How to tackle warranty in this situation

[bigboto69]

EC "A" has performed, I'd say 50% of the scope. The GC recognized that they were not performing according to the schedule. EC "A" was asked to work along side of EC "B". EC "A" did not like the idea, and decided to leave. EC "B" were asked to do the impossible and complete the project.

Now there were some task done by EC "A", that had to be redone by EC "B". So I would have to say, EC "B" had a little more than 50% to complete the work. And not to mention the investigating. Well, that was the easy part.

The hard part - The question:

We have not been asked, but feel it coming, Warranty???? How to warranty the work that has been performed on this project??? EC "B" is trying to keep from being exposed too much, but be fair about warranting their work that were performed. Now, I see being that EC "B" was the last electrical contractor on site, they are going to be the ones that will be called if anything goes wrong to perform warranty work. What happens if it's work done by EC "A"?

How do I approach this situation? Has anyone gone through this situation before? How have you combat the situation, and how did the GC take it?

 

[220/221]

B puts it writing that he is only responsible for the work he did.

If something goes wrong, blame it on A.

 

[satcom]

EC "A" has performed, I'd say 50% of the scope. The GC recognized that they were not performing according to the schedule. EC "A" was asked to work along side of EC "B". EC "A" did not like the idea, and decided to leave. EC "B" were asked to do the impossible and complete the project.

Now there were some task done by EC "A", that had to be redone by EC "B". So I would have to say, EC "B" had a little more than 50% to complete the work. And not to mention the investigating. Well, that was the easy part.

The hard part - The question:

We have not been asked, but feel it coming, Warranty???? How to warranty the work that has been performed on this project??? EC "B" is trying to keep from being exposed too much, but be fair about warranting their work that were performed. Now, I see being that EC "B" was the last electrical contractor on site, they are going to be the ones that will be called if anything goes wrong to perform warranty work. What happens if it's work done by EC "A"?

How do I approach this situation? Has anyone gone through this situation before? How have you combat the situation, and how did the GC take it?

EC B took over and should have included the details in his contract, no problem just go by what was agreed in the contract, reason we are called contractors, we have the scope of work and all the warranty rules in writing signed and agreed before we start any work

 

[bigboto69]

EC B took over and should have included the details in his contract, no problem just go by what was agreed in the contract, reason we are called contractors, we have the scope of work and all the warranty rules in writing signed and agreed before we start any work

I forgot to mention, EC"A" has the original contract, which included the warranty work. I can't imagine his intention was that he was going to walk from this project. A good contractor will stand by his work. But warranting work that hasn't been performed by yourself is opening a can of worms. The more I think about it this is beginning to look complex.

 

[mcclary's electrical]

I forgot to mention, EC"A" has the original contract, which included the warranty work. I can't imagine his intention was that he was going to walk from this project. A good contractor will stand by his work. But warranting work that hasn't been performed by yourself is opening a can of worms. The more I think about it this is beginning to look complex.

It's not complex at all. You warranty what you did, and not what they did. IF,,,,,,,,,and WHEN,,,,,,a problem arises, investigate, and inform owner at that time wheter or not it was something you did, or the first guy. There's no need to worry about it now.

 

[480sparky]

Let's see what's written in the contracts.

You could easily front-load a price into a new contract to finish the job, with enough funds to cover any warranty issues you may feel pop up.

 

[satcom]

Let's see what's written in the contracts.

You could easily front-load a price into a new contract to finish the job, with enough funds to cover any warranty issues you may feel pop up.

My thoughts sounds good, just hope he gets it in writing.

 

[bigboto69]

Let's see what's written in the contracts.

You could easily front-load a price into a new contract to finish the job, with enough funds to cover any warranty issues you may feel pop up.

Who knows what the contract language was? EC "B" has not see one. EC "B" has a great relationship with the GC. The GC asked EC "B" to assist to bail them out to meet the aggressive deadline, and avoid LD's.

It's really easy to say EC "B" should take responsibility for the warranty part of the work. I'm sure EC "A" has added a couple points to cover warranty issues. EC "B" agreed to do their part on a T&M basis. I'm also assume EC "A" has front loaded their SOV.

So let me try to explain how it could be complex. Let's say this is Microsoft project(expensive high end cool stuff). EC "A" purchased most of the expensive materials. EC "B" mostly purchased commodities needed to complete the project. EC "B's" most cost was labor(basically to catch up to speed, and meet the aggressive schedule).

Now, project is complete. 4 months down the road, there is a call to the GC that a their light is not coming on. GC, I assume would call EC "B", because they were the last one to leave the site. EC "B" goes in, and after researching for about 20 hours, and finally realizing that the problem was a broken conductor in the conduit off of the breaker. In series, it starts at the breaker, through a contactor, though another controlling contactor, to the light switch, then down a couple floors to the breaker. Not to mention the countless J-boxes to get there. EC "B" installed the switch, but EC "A" has installed everything else in that run. Ss we find that EC "A" should be here to fix their faulty installation.

Well, how does EC "B" explain to GC, and have them to compensate for the hours that EC "B" spent to find that it wasn't their problem. EC "A" will tell the GC to pound sand. It's hard not to think of this before hand, because you know warranty is always an issue, even when you're the only EC. You want to be ready for the question, so we have a solution to this madness. Like I said earlier, I see it that this can get really complex.

One idea I thought of, is to get the foremen in, and highlight with a legend of colors explaining what was installed by who. But that will take some time as well.

 

[bradleyelectric]

T&M that is how you accepted the work. That is how you bill any time you walk on the job.

 

[480sparky]

Who knows what the contract language was? .................

That's why I said, "Let's see what's written in the contracts."

 

[Rewire]

Get it in writing then spend the money to have a contract lawyer review it best money spent.

 

[satcom]

Get it in writing then spend the money to have a contract lawyer review it best money spent.

Many times someone will fail to protect them self and their business with a written contract, covering the scope of work, and conditions with all the terms spelled out , we have a contract with every T&M job, to avoid problems, large dollar contracts with out contract reviews, can cost you plenty.

 

[growler]

I forgot to mention, EC"A" has the original contract, which included the warranty work.

I'm not sure that EC "B" even had any legal right to be on the job site.

If EC "A" had a contract to do the work and a work schedule then there were legal clauses to adress how this would be handed if he were not meeting the schedule.

If this is a big enough job to be worth anything I can see this ending up in court. I can't see a contractor walking off the job just for the fun of it, they must think they have a legal right to do so.

This is just my opinion and I'm certainly not a lawyer and wouldn't want to be one but I think a lot would depend on the original contract and if the GC had the legal right to bring in a second contractor.

From what I have seen it's not that easy because someone has to be the contractor of record. In this state EC "A" would have to cancel his permit to allow contractor "B" to take over the job. Somone would have to assume responsibly for the work. We are not just talking about warranty here but there are liability issues as well. If someone is hurt because of a faulty installation this could get serious. Imagine a fire in a nice big commercial building. There would be lawyers comming out of the woodwork going after someone ( everyone involved ). Right now just who's insurance is covering what?

It all goes back to the original contract that EC "A" had with the GC. Someone is up the creek right now, EC "A" for walking off the job or the GC for bringing in a second contractor without the legal right to do so.

 

[petersonra]

It seems to me that the GC created a mess by the way he managed the project and it is his problem to deal with fixing the mess he created, not some poor sub.

EC "B" is working on a T&M basis, and if I were EC "B" thats the way I would handle any future warranty work that involved anything that I was not solely responsible for. EC "B" should get some kind of agreement in writing about this, but this seems like the only fair way to handle things.

How the GC deals with EC "A" is the GC's problem.

 

[petersonra]

I'm not sure that EC "B" even had any legal right to be on the job site.

I can't imagine any GC writing a contract that did not allow him to finish a job that was abandoned by a sub, for whatever reason. Especially one that has LD.

In any case, that is an issue between EC "A" and the GC and does not really concern EC "B".

I wonder if EC "A" was being paid promptly. Subs often work faster when the bills are actually being paid.

 

[bigboto69]

I can't imagine any GC writing a contract that did not allow him to finish a job that was abandoned by a sub, for whatever reason. Especially one that has LD.

In any case, that is an issue between EC "A" and the GC and does not really concern EC "B".

I wonder if EC "A" was being paid promptly. Subs often work faster when the bills are actually being paid.

So let's EC "B" tell the GC to pound sand when it comes to warranty (In a professional way of course). What happens when the GC says,"Mr. EC "B", your telling me, you can't stand by your work?"

 

[petersonra]

So let's EC "B" tell the GC to pound sand when it comes to warranty (In a professional way of course). What happens when the GC says,"Mr. EC "B", your telling me, you can't stand by your work?"

Note what I actually wrote.

EC "B" is working on a T&M basis, and if I were EC "B" thats the way I would handle any future warranty work that involved anything that I was not solely responsible for.

I don't see how B can be held responsible for work done by A, and he would be foolish to accept that responsibility. For the work B did, his normal warranty should still hold.

 

[mcclary's electrical]

I can't imagine any GC writing a contract that did not allow him to finish a job that was abandoned by a sub, for whatever reason. Especially one that has LD.

In any case, that is an issue between EC "A" and the GC and does not really concern EC "B".

I wonder if EC "A" was being paid promptly. Subs often work faster when the bills are actually being paid.

In VA, the job is not "officially" considered abandoned until I don't show up for 30 days. So.....if inside of that 30 days, another contractor touches my work, he just bought it

 

[growler]

Who knows what the contract language was? EC "B" has not see one. EC "B" has a great relationship with the GC. The GC asked EC "B" to assist to bail them out to meet the aggressive deadline, and avoid LD's.

I can't imagine any GC writing a contract that did not allow him to finish a job that was abandoned by a sub, for whatever reason. Especially one that has LD.

I can't imagine that an EC would sign a contract giving the GC the right to bring in another contractor of his choosing to do part of the job while his company ( EC "A" ) is still there on the job and that does sound like what the GC was going to do.

Here is what I think the GC tried to do. He would bring in a second contractor on this job and pay them time and materials and then try to deduct this amount from the original contract price from EC "A".

The money for the second electrical crew has to come from some place. If the GC is allowed to bring in a second crew and bill them against the original contract then he wouldn't hesitate to work them at all kinds of overtime because it wouldn't come out of his pocket.

I admit that this is just a guess but where else would the money come from to hire a second crew and ask the original contractor to work with them. And don't believe all that crap about falling behind schedule, a GC will frame a wall in the morning and want to hang rock that afternoon and try to blame it on the EC being behind if the can't do it that way.

 

[growler]

EC "A" has performed, I'd say 50% of the scope. The GC recognized that they were not performing according to the schedule. EC "A" was asked to work along side of EC "B". EC "A" did not like the idea, and decided to leave.

OK so EC "A" is asked to work along side of EC "B" then just where does the money come from to pay for the second contractor and the second crew/crews?

I'm just guessing but I can't see a GC willing to bite the bullet and suffer this kind of a loss. I'm thinking that he would want to bring in a second crew and work them all kinds of overtime and try to deduct this cost from the original contract price with EC "A".

Sorry for the second post on the same line. I didn't appear that the first post a going to work.

I'm just throwing this out there to see what others think.