Drainage Problem/No Contract signed.

[Metal Green Mickey]

If we are referring to ADT, I have to say I was surprised that I did see a number of people stand up to some of the people (who are very anti-Brent) and unfortunately obtained people who do seem to have a crack at anything Argyle related. Its just a handful which seem to have a spiteful agenda which has gone on now for many years. However, I do think there are some reasonable posters too who have made contributions which are asking some thought provoking, but sensible questions.

 

[IJN]

I was referring to the Facebook page.

Also, please don't advertise that other site on here please.

Thanks. I hope you can understand why.

 

[Metal Green Mickey]

It wasn't really an attention to advertise it but more to just explain why we have these questions and why even a thread like this is raised.

Unfortunately, whilst you may not like it all the sites because they are Argyle related are inter-woven I feel from a social media standpoint.

However, noted about mentioning the other site. Apologies!

 

[IJN]

Normally I'd agree, but as I am being libelled, defamed along with members of my family, I'm sure you'll understand.

Thanks Mickey.

 

[Bermudian Green]

[
My guess is that the works would be carried out under a JCT Design and Build Contract but, I agree, the points you make are valid, the most likely cause of any delay in signing the contract would be incomplete design information in which circumstance both parties would be loathe to enter into an agreement. Apart from any other design shortfalls PCC’s Civil Engineer has asked for more information to discharge the drainage planning condition and until that is finalised, as you say, it would not be possible to agree a final cost of the drainage works.

It is the construction industry and all this is quite normal but I do agree with some earlier posts that more communication from the club would be much appreciated.

I thought that the refurb was already designed, so not D&B? Either way, I see nothing here which is even in the slightest bit unusual.

Neath Green mentioned the NEC target Cost FoC earlier. I did one of those recently on a $22M project, pain/gain, and were way underway before the contract itself was signed. Time was of the essence, so although the design was substantially complete, which allowed construction to start, the contract itself couldn't be signed because some of the later details hadn't been finalised.

 

[Kentishgreen]

Thanks Ian. I tend to avoid sites posted on by the mentally challenged meaning no disrespect to those that are actually mentally challenged.

 

[rsp4]

I rarely post on here but I am an avid reader. I have read with amusement the consternation over the fact that a contract has not been signed. As a Chartered Civil engineer with over 35years in construction I can tell you that this far more common than people think. It is not uncommon to be commence work on a project under a letter of intent until the final T and C's of the contract are agreed. In fact a PO can be issued to cover start up costs and enabling works. Our company has only just signed the contract for a 5 year framework with a major national client some 6 months into the start of the contract having worked on a award letter and initial PO.
I have no knowledge of what is happening behind the scenes at PAFC this is only my view and assumption. I guess that the contract will be NEC Option C or D which is target cost. Until all the designs are signed off and costs agreed then the contract will not be signed by the contractor, as such the drainage issue could be one of the reasons why the contract is not signed. It is not something that I am at all concerned about because I would have no doubt that all concerned will be working to resolve issues asap.

Ideal a SME point of view instead of conspiracy theorists. Thsnk you

Still Brent out he should have the drains would be an issue. Typical Argyle.

Get a grip people plrase. The season will soon start