Contract issues .....

[zbang]

3) the GC wants the right to audit our books for the project; not just for change orders, but for the entire project.

Sure, but only if you get the right to audit theirs. For the entire project.


As for the rest, I agree with pretty much everyone else.

 

[brantmacga]

What did your lawyer say about these things when he reviewed the contract for you?

Lawyer reviewed today and said do not sign.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[brantmacga]

You don't get paid if he doesn't get paid. You just know he's going to tell you he didn't get paid.

That's my biggest issue; never signed a contract w/ a "pay when paid" clause, but did have a GC drag on about not being paid by the customer, a large national retail brand. We were able to track down someone w/ the owner who sent us copies of cleared checks to the GC. It was a substantial amount of money laid out for roughly 4/mo. They finally sent us a check a day before the attorneys were going to file a lien on the job.

 

[petersonra]

That's my biggest issue; never signed a contract w/ a "pay when paid" clause, but did have a GC drag on about not being paid by the customer, a large national retail brand. We were able to track down someone w/ the owner who sent us copies of cleared checks to the GC. It was a substantial amount of money laid out for roughly 4/mo. They finally sent us a check a day before the attorneys were going to file a lien on the job.

the big chains do not like it one bit when someone files liens against their buildings. they will definitely put some pressure on the GC if that happens.

 

[brantmacga]

Contract issues .....

the big chains do not like it one bit when someone files liens against their buildings. they will definitely put some pressure on the GC if that happens.

They definitely helped us out. I'm not sure but I think the GC was hit with liquidated damages for falling behind and had a cash crunch. The brand's ACM was a nightmare to work with. He was "threatening" me with damages also for being on schedule instead of ahead of schedule, so I sorta knew what the GC was dealing with, but you can only swallow a few months payroll for so long. I think i had 10 guys on that job at the end.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[brantmacga]

thought i'd update for y'all......

after some back-and-forth emails and phone discussions, the GC was willing to revise the contract language to what we felt was more acceptable, especially the pay-when-paid clause. I spoke w/ VP of the company, and his initial explanation was that the contract was reciprocal from the customer, but in the end we got the changes needed. I understood their viewpoint, and they were willing to be understanding of mine. So looks like everything is good to go. I appreciate all the input.

 

[gadfly56]

thought i'd update for y'all......

after some back-and-forth emails and phone discussions, the GC was willing to revise the contract language to what we felt was more acceptable, especially the pay-when-paid clause. I spoke w/ VP of the company, and his initial explanation was that the contract was reciprocal from the customer, but in the end we got the changes needed. I understood their viewpoint, and they were willing to be understanding of mine. So looks like everything is good to go. I appreciate all the input.

Glad you had a satisfactory outcome. Hope the job goes smoothly!

 

[cowboyjwc]

That's my biggest issue; never signed a contract w/ a "pay when paid" clause, but did have a GC drag on about not being paid by the customer, a large national retail brand. We were able to track down someone w/ the owner who sent us copies of cleared checks to the GC. It was a substantial amount of money laid out for roughly 4/mo. They finally sent us a check a day before the attorneys were going to file a lien on the job.

Yep, just can't trust people anymore. Glad you got everything worked out.

 

[cdslotz]

thought i'd update for y'all......

after some back-and-forth emails and phone discussions, the GC was willing to revise the contract language to what we felt was more acceptable, especially the pay-when-paid clause. I spoke w/ VP of the company, and his initial explanation was that the contract was reciprocal from the customer, but in the end we got the changes needed. I understood their viewpoint, and they were willing to be understanding of mine. So looks like everything is good to go. I appreciate all the input.

Good for you doing your due diligence....it's a pain to have to do this for every contract. They are all one-sided in favor of the GC.

Some GC's have some scary liability clauses that can hold subs liable for accidents or damages, even if you were not a party to, or even on the job.

Our best GC's send us a yearly contract we sign addressing all of the "boilerplate" issues. The attorney only has to review that one document.
When you are awarded another job, the contract is just specific to that job...price, scope, special conditions of the specs, etc...
If all that checks out...you're good to go

 

[petersonra]

Yep, just can't trust people anymore. Glad you got everything worked out.

customers can ask for anything they want. it is up to the supplier to decide if they are willing to give the customer what they asked for.

 

[Fulthrotl]

thought i'd update for y'all......

after some back-and-forth emails and phone discussions, the GC was willing to revise the contract language to what we felt was more acceptable, especially the pay-when-paid clause. I spoke w/ VP of the company, and his initial explanation was that the contract was reciprocal from the customer, but in the end we got the changes needed. I understood their viewpoint, and they were willing to be understanding of mine. So looks like everything is good to go. I appreciate all the input.

with the caveat that someone who writes a contract like that does so for
a reason. that speaks more to who you are dealing with than the
language does.

you've been doing this stuff a long time. you know the dance. make sure
your progress payments are clearly delineated. don't let them get into you
for very much.

if you can have them provide the lighting package, that's a start.
when panels are ordered should be the time agreed for a draw for them,
not when they are delivered, imho. not a common practice, but so what?

i'm just sayin', cover your ass. and let us know how it turns out.

 

[gadfly56]

Good for you doing your due diligence....it's a pain to have to do this for every contract. They are all one-sided in favor of the GC.

Some GC's have some scary liability clauses that can hold subs liable for accidents or damages, even if you were not a party to, or even on the job.

Our best GC's send us a yearly contract we sign addressing all of the "boilerplate" issues. The attorney only has to review that one document.
When you are awarded another job, the contract is just specific to that job...price, scope, special conditions of the specs, etc...
If all that checks out...you're good to go

At my last employer, we called them "evergreen" contracts. They may or may not have been reviewed yearly but the intention was to speed up the procurement process for our recurring customers so we could get the work in the pipeline with minimum delay.

 

[Joseph0129]

Walk away, too much risk and it sounds like the GC is a jerk

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

 

[kwired]

Walk away, too much risk and it sounds like the GC is a jerk

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

OP and the GC came to an acceptable agreement according to post 26.

 

[Okie Sparky]

If it's this much hassle on the front end, I can only imagine how much hassle it will be on the back end. (No pun intended.) I was involved with one of these about a year ago, when it was finished I wished I'd never contracted the job. Re-wrote the contract on the front end (think lawyer's fees), then on the back end the last few progress payments were strung out, as well as the final payment and retainage. There was a bid bond in play or I would have probably walked away.

 

[Ingenieur]

I got a contract today for a job I bid awhile back, and I had some issues with some of the language included I wanted to ask y'all about.

1) the contract states we understand that we will not be paid if the GC isn't paid.

2) the GC wants unconditional lien waivers before releasing a check.

3) the GC wants the right to audit our books for the project; not just for change orders, but for the entire project.

4) the GC wants all payments held in a trust; this project is not bonded.

5) the GC wants us to provide 1 hr for every 50 hours on site for part of a composite clean-up crew. We are required to clean our work area as usual, but they want us to provide labor to be directed by their PM to clean the entire site.
.....

There are also a couple of items outlining responsibility for things that are expressly excluded in my proposal. I asked for an addendum to the contract, and was told none would be given.....

private or public work?
was the contract in the bid package? Did you see it prior to bidding?
is the contract more stringent than his?
did he solicit the bid from you or did you seek him out and offer it?

1 actually quite common
2 common
3 no, only back up for change orders
4 no, bs tying up your $$$ contingent upon his meeting his obligations
5 that is a business decision, can you absorb it?

If general when you bid you can't exclude items in the bid docs and defined as being within your scope

 

[petersonra]

Seems like he was able to come to an agreement with the general contractor on terms they could both live with. That's usually the way these things shake out.