How Women Can Save Engineering

Eliza Serna-Cochrane is a metalworking fluids sales engineer and writes for Akramatic Engineering. Here she shares her thoughts on how UK engineering can address its gender disparity problem. And how this might even save the industry itself.

Five years ago, Engineering UK released an alarming report on the future sustainability of the sector. The single biggest concern was simply how many people were leaving engineering jobs. Which is far more than how many are being recruited.

And although the figures proposed by Engineering UK varied considerably (from 69,000 up to 186,000), even the lowest estimate undermined the long-term viability of the sector. With as few as 46,000 people entering the sector from apprenticeships or graduate positions every year.

Flash forward to the latest report and it seems not a whole lot has changed. Except that much more research has been done to understanding the situation and the figures have titled slightly in the right direction.

The biggest and most obvious solution to this recruitment shortfall is to encourage more women into the workforce. As of the 2020 report, women remain “severely underrepresented” (their words) in UK engineering. And women actually outnumber men in the country. But there are obstacles that we still need to address if we are to make things right.

How UK engineering fails women

It is remarkable that Britain, the birthplace of the Scientific Method, lags behind so many countries when it comes to equality in the STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) fields.

For example, it has the lowest proportion of women in engineering out of any European country (11%). Even many North African countries, such as Algeria and Tunisia perform better than we do. In the far east, India, Malaysia, and a handful of Middle Eastern countries all have more women engineers than we do.

It’s not really clear why this is. Some critics have blamed the government’s previous arms-length relationships with business (which is changing thanks to gender-pay gap reporting); to cultural differences abroad (for example, some scholars will argue that women are less likely to choose an engineering job when they have more personal freedoms).

But for a lot of people, the cause could be down to a cultural problem at the heart of our society.

Is culture really the problem?

Currently, an estimated 14% of women are taking STEM subjects at A-level or higher. Things are improving, but what’s been holding women back?

Sarah Peers, the vice-president of the Women’s Engineering Society, has largely blamed stereotyping, and a ‘pro-masculine’ work structure for gender disparity. To address the issues, in her eyes, men need more time for child-centric duties, and not just women. Traditionally, major roles, such as that of CEOs, have not been kind to new mothers, who cannot be available twenty-four hours a day unlike a male colleague — a disadvantage that resembles something of a mothering ‘penalty’.

But the problem could run deeper than that. It could start with how we educate girls and boys about engineering.

It has been argued that, from very early on, we as a society send mixed messages about what girls can and can’t do, and what they are expected to do. To counteract this, local campaigns have begun targeting teenage girls; teaching them about the benefits of engineering when they are doing their A-levels. But some people argue that it needs to start much earlier. Some campaign groups are employing women engineers to talk to children in primary school. One organisation, Early Years Engineer, even talks to girls as young as three.

In countries such as Ghana, certain educational institutions (such as Ashesi University) managed to get an almost 50:50 female-male participation rate by talking differently about engineering that we are used to. The lecturers and teachers reframed the subject to become more of a problem-solving one and an emphatic one — such as how engineering can be used to help improve other people’s fortunes and the environment.

This latter point plays to the strengths of theorists who have long suspected that women tend to be more interested in people, whereas men are traditionally more interested in things.

Are we ‘shutting out’ women?

There is an even more contentious issue at play here. One that pins the blame on unconscious bias, or even plain old sexism.

People with this viewpoint might argue that, because female engineers almost always find themselves outnumbered or alone in work, then they may be made to feel unwelcome in some way.

In one study, 63% of female engineers said they had experienced sexism. One engineer, who wished to remain anonymous, posted on Reddit that her male colleagues would inappropriately touch her, and talk about her sexually when she was present.

Old habits are passed along from one generation to another, but they can be altered. Echoing Peers, another challenge would be to educate all engineers of the dangers of stereotyping, for a better and more understanding workplace.

Why UK engineering needs women

Not only would encouraging more women into the sector help to address the massive shortfall in recruitment — it would bring sizable economic benefits.

For example, studies have shown that companies with women on the board perform 54% better than without, suggesting that gender-parity does benefit from diverse thinking in the boardroom.

A World Bank study in May 2018 estimated that gender equality could enrich the global economy by up to £120 trillion. And that the current gender shortcomings in the UK could be draining up to 14% of its wealth. And finally, a McKinsey report found dual-benefits to having more women in the boardroom: a greater female visibility encourages a greater female uptake across an entire company, and even seems to provide an overall financial boost.

If engineering is to survive, it needs to adapt. And so it is time for some social engineering. A comfortable balance must be established between gender lines, in order to open up the sector for everyone, no matter their identity and background.

If you would like to read more stories like this, then please click here

The post How Women Can Save Engineering appeared first on UK Construction Online.

Kier Highways Awarded Birmingham Contract

Kier Highways has been awarded a six-month extension from Birmingham Highways Ltd (BHL) on its Birmingham Interim Services Contract (ISC). This extension is set to run until 30 December 2021.

Kier was appointed to the contract in April 2020; it was originally due to run for 15 months with an option to extend, and includes the city’s traffic operations, planned and reactive maintenance, inspections and winter servicing. BHL has exercised its right to trigger the first extension option available under the contract and will consider further extension in the future.

Work has begun to procure surveys, extend sub-contracts, identify programmes of work and develop a plan for the delivery of services during the extension period. The plan will include aspects of programmed maintenance, including the continuation of street lighting replacement, surfacing works and capital investment.

Joe Incutti, Group Managing Director for Highways, said: “We are thrilled that we have been awarded this extension, and it is testament to the contract team’s hard work and expertise in delivering highways services for local authority roads. We look forward to continuing to provide safe and reliable highway services to communities across Birmingham.”

Kevin Hicks, Birmingham City Council’s Assistant Director for Highways and Infrastructure, also welcomed the decision: “We have been pleased with Kier’s role in taking over for BHL since April last year, in difficult circumstances with COVID-19 and with a short mobilisation. They have been and continue to be an important part of improving Birmingham’s highway services for the future.”

Natasha Rouse, Chief Executive Officer at BHL, commented: “BHL is very pleased to be able to extend the Interim Services Contract with Kier. Our teams have built a truly constructive relationship, and we look forward to continuing our collaboration with Kier in improving Birmingham’s transport network.”

Since the contract began, 288,533m² of carriageway and 82,476m² of footways have been repaired. This is in addition to ongoing management activities which saw the team inspect 70,792km of roads along with installing 1387 new LED lights.

If you would like to read more stories like this, then please click here

The post Kier Highways Awarded Birmingham Contract appeared first on UK Construction Online.

PlanRadar and British Land Team Up

PlanRadar has announced that is has formed a new partnership with British Land. As of May 2021, British Land’s Retail Operations division will start to use PlanRadar in the field to track repairs, works and recurring maintenance at locations throughout the UK.

The company’s retail portfolio reaches from Plymouth to Inverness and includes retail parks, shopping centre and superstores.

Management of such a large portfolio spread throughout the UK requires members of their field-based team to travel extensively and maximise the time spent on the ground at each location.

Richard Nield, Head of Retail Operations at British Land, said: “After trialling PlanRadar in 2020, we’re excited to begin using the software at all our properties.

“At the moment, there is particular pressure on retail managers to reduce operating costs. We see PlanRadar as an option that will provide concrete time-savings for our colleagues, while being cost-effective. The initial rollout will focus on streamlining the repair and maintenance process, but we see plenty of other processes that could benefit from this flexible solution in the future.”

While some of the retail team operations at British Land have been digitised, management of repairs requires a manual input. This has necessitated additional time after site visits to record evidence, make decisions and file purchase orders.

With the new flexible task management feature from PlanRadar, property management can use mobile devices to pinpoint faults on digital plans while at properties. They can then add photographs, voice memos and other evidence and send the task directly to a supplier for resolution. Suppliers are also able to access the platform via free accounts so they can communicate directly as well as updating progress.

By digitising this process, the property manager will automatically be able to compile a complete record of all communications and decisions, along with date and time stamped evidence, which will be stored in one place for all to access.

PlanRadar’s Matt Ryan, Country Manager for the UK and Sweden, commented: “British Land came to us looking for a simple, cost-effective solution for repairs and maintenance – and crucially one that wouldn’t be an additional burden to staff or suppliers, instead adapting to their existing processes. We’re delighted that the testing phase went well and we look forward to a successful collaboration, and helping the team to reduce their operating costs.”

If you would like to read more stories like this, then please click here

The post PlanRadar and British Land Team Up appeared first on UK Construction Online.

Building the Commercial Case for Digital

The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust is working on an exciting project to create a new healthcare campus as part of the government’s Health Infrastructure Plan. When opened, the campus will transform how care is delivered across the Hertfordshire and West Essex Integrated Care System; to enable this transformation the trust’s board has stated that ‘it wants to be the most digitally advanced hospital in the UK’. To help form a business case to achieve its ambitions, the trust has been working with Gemserv Health.

The Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust serves a population of 350,000 people living around the M11 corridor just north of London. It provides general acute, outpatient and diagnostic services from three sites, including its main hospital in Harlow.

Princess Alexandra Hospital is a classic ‘hospital building programme’ facility opened in phases from 1958 to 1966. In August last year, the trust confirmed exciting plans to create a new healthcare campus, supported by the government’s Health Infrastructure Plan (HIP) to build or refurbish 40 hospitals.

The Department of Health and Social Care’s outline for the HIP makes it clear that “it is not just about bricks and mortar” but about making sure that the “digital technologies and data sharing capabilities” are in place to provide better care to the public.

Digital agency NHSX has developed a blueprint for what these might mean; and it is very ambitious. So, as Helen Davis, the deputy programme director for the new Princess Alexandra Hospital explains, it will use elements of the blueprint to make sure it is one of the most digitally enabled in the country.

“We have the advantage of being one of the few hospitals in the programme to be working on a complete new build,” she says. “So, we are able to plan to transform all elements of the patient journey using digital.

“That means everything from the moment people arrive at the hospital to the way they move through the building, to how their treatment is provided, to the way in which the building itself is managed. All of this will be supported by new technology and digital solutions.”

Building up the business case

Significant work has been undertaken by the trust in developing its business case and roadmap for achieving its ambitious goal, and this has been shared with the HIP’s New Hospital Programme executives, NHSE/I and NHSX, with positive feedback. As such a project is vast and complex, the trust has engaged specialist expertise from Gemserv Health to create a commercial case for the digital elements.

Mike Entwistle, managing consultant, specialising in commercial and procurement support to organisations like Princess Alexandra, says: “The NHSX Blueprint for Digitally Advanced Hospitals covers all aspects of digital; not just clinical systems, but systems that affect how the hospital operates. Everything from how reception is run to how the air conditioning is controlled.

“Princess Alexandra’s plans are based on the blueprint, so it needed some commercial expertise to support the digital business case that will feed into the bigger outline business case. We put together a small team of experienced consultants to do that.”

The Gemserv team helped the trust to think through how it wanted to deliver the technology, taking account of the resources available to support different delivery options. Then, it helped the trust to work out how best to procure the preferred delivery options.

One of a number of ideas that was explored in some detail was whether the trust could collaborate with national digital and procurement bodies and other HIP hospital trusts to create a specific set of framework arrangements for any of the 40 organisations in the HIP to use.  Although carefully considered, the timing and a limited capacity within the organisations to bring this all together meant it was not viable for the trust to pursue this option.

In the end the key issue became whether the trust should look to work with many suppliers on the different elements of the blueprint, or whether it should look to work with one or two lead contractors to secure them.

“A lot of what is in the blueprint is very new technology,” Entwistle says. “Most of it is in use somewhere in the world, but no organisation is using all of it anywhere. That means the trusts in the HIP are going to need to find the right suppliers; the people who don’t just deliver the component parts but make it all work together in an integrated way.

“In the end, we produced a commercial case that took account of the trust’s capacity to manage its suppliers and its appetite for risk.”

Questions for trusts with digital ambitions, everywhere

Ian Carr, director of healthcare, at Gemserv Health, says these basic questions – what do trusts really want to achieve with digital technology, and what is the best way for them to procure, integrate and manage that – will need to be asked by all organisations in the HIP.

In fact, these questions will need to be asked by all organisations with big ‘digital hospital’ or ‘hospital of the future’ ambitions. “This is not just a traditional system procurement,” he says. “It is proper, digital architecture. Admin, clinical and management systems. Robots delivering things around the hospital.

“It is really cutting-edge stuff. If it all works, these hospitals will be fantastic. But to make it all work, trusts are really going to have to think through their commercial cases and to make sure they reflect their capacity for procuring, integrating and managing the relationships that will be involved.”

Another interesting aspect of the building programme is that it will be done against the backdrop of the NHS’ ambitious targets to become the first health service in the world to achieve net zero. “All 40 hospitals in the HIP will have to think net zero, and that’s something else we can help them with,” Carr says.

The next steps for Princess Alexandra is to complete the outline business case (OBC). Davis says that once the OBC has been approved by the trust’s board, the intention is to submit the case to NHSE/I this autumn, for approval.

In the meantime, the trust plans to push ahead with the procurement and deployment of clinical IT systems, starting with e-prescribing, so it has a full electronic record in place and in use before the move into the new hospital. As things stand, the aim is for this to happen in 2026.

“At the moment, our hospitals have limited digital maturity, so we will be implementing new IT in waves, as the new hospital is developed,” Davis says. “The work that Gemserv Health did for us is a small but important part of the picture.

“The big picture is about transforming the way in which healthcare is delivered for our communities and creating a much more modern, much more welcoming place for our clinicians to work and our patients to be treated.”

If you would like to read more stories like this, then please click here

The post Building the Commercial Case for Digital appeared first on UK Construction Online.

Tax refunds & Construction Industry Scheme

Stephen Chapman is Senior Tax Manager at Brian Alfred, a specialist accountancy firm for construction workers, in this feature he looks at tax refunds and the Construction Industry Scheme (CIS)

The construction industry has faced a major crisis in the last year, with the pandemic ceasing non-essential work on sites right across the country. In April 2020, the industry’s output was reported to be down by a record 40 per cent, and thousands of jobs were at risk.

The sector is now beginning to show positive signs of growth, with more construction workers getting back on site. For January, 2021, the Office of National Statistics recorded a 1.7 per cent increase in new work, driven by private and commercial infrastructure.

Despite the encouraging signs, the number of Self-Employment Income Support Scheme (SEISS) claims continues to be high, with the government recently confirming two more rounds of grants, which are expected to support an extra 600,000 newly self-employed workers that have not been eligible for the first three grants but had submitted their tax returns for 2019/20 by March 2.

But 12 months on from its introduction – many self-employed construction workers have still yet to fully appreciate the impact that SEISS grants will have on their tax bill.

Here, Stephen Chapman, Senior Tax Manager at Brian Alfred, explains why taxes, and prospects of a rebate, may have changed for those registered with the Construction Industry Scheme (CIS).

Being CIS registered is key  

To be sure your tax and any rebate is calculated correctly, being registered with the Construction Industry Scheme (CIS) is crucial. As a HMRC initiative, it aims to protect construction workers from unexpected tax bills and curb tax evasion across the industry.

Most self-employed workers in construction – those with either a sole trader or a limited company set-up – have registered for the CIS already. Although there are some that have not with certain exceptions to the rule, the majority of contractors deem this an essential requirement when choosing which self-employed workers to sub-contract work to.

The CIS generally allows a 20 per cent rate of tax on earnings, whereas as non-registered contractors could pay more. The scheme directs contractors to make deductions of 20 per cent to a subcontractor’s earnings at source, which is then passed onto HMRC to count as payment towards tax and National Insurance contributions.

Registering for the CIS can be done on the HMRC website, and it’s the responsibility of the contractor to establish whether subcontractors are CIS registered, and are genuinely self employed and then pay them accordingly.

An essential part of the scheme is the requirement for all self-employed construction workers to submit an annual self-assessment, declaring all earnings and expenses, which HMRC will use to calculate an annual tax bill. Personal Tax Returns can be submitted from  6th April and must be filed electronically by the following 31st January.

Receiving a CIS tax rebate

Being CIS registered, and therefore being taxed at 20 per cent, means some sub-contractors may be eligible for a CIS tax rebate, but they will only receive this once they can prove their earnings to HMRC.

When filing a tax return, it is then possible for sub-contractors to claim the CIS deductions back and offset this against any potential tax liabilities for the year. Once expenses have been claimed, we often find that more tax has been deducted than required and this means that the sub-contractor is due a CIS Tax rebate, which can be as much as thousands of pounds.

It’s important to claim allowable expenses as this will maximise the value of the CIS Tax rebate at the end of the year. Things such as PPE equipment, business telephone calls, vehicle running costs and tools or equipment are all things that can be claimed for with the right documentation, so keeping receipts and sales information or invoices is vitally important.

The impact of SEISS

For the 2020/21 tax year, self-employed workers that are CIS-registered may have received grants from the SEISS, which has seen up to 80 per cent of monthly profits, capped at £2,500 per month, being paid out.

The scheme received huge take-up, and the construction industry contributed the highest number of eligible workers, with 884,000 claims for SEISS, totalling £3.1 billion as of 31 July 2020.

Three rounds of SEISS grants have now been and gone with the fourth opening in late April covering the period between February, March and April 2021, and a fifth grant later this year. Those who meet the criteria can claim 80 per cent of average monthly profits capped at £2,500, which is in keeping with previous SEISS grants. The grant will be paid out in a single instalment, capped at £7,500.

For those who have received a SEISS grant in the current 2020/2021 tax year, the amount received will be deemed as taxable income and this is a crucial factor that all sub-contractors need to be aware of. This is because it may lead to the erosion of any refund or a larger tax bill than would be expected or that many will have seen in previous years, compounded by the fact that expenses are also likely to be much lower.

Manage your tax bill quickly and effectively

It’s important to act swiftly when it comes to managing tax, and we find that applications typically peak in April and May following the start of the new tax year when self-employed workers are expecting CIS tax rebates. For those expecting to have to pay tax, we tend to find that they will typically wait until December or January and leave payments until the very later stages of the payment deadline. That could be very dangerous this year, given that some sub-contractors may not be expecting a tax bill.

Being registered with CIS brings many benefits, but it also places additional responsibilities for the sub-contractor. You must keep up to date accounts of your income, and submit self-assessments on time, as you can be heavily fined for late or non-submissions.

If you’re owed a rebate, you could also be targeted by unscrupulous firms claiming to offer large amounts, and charging higher fees fraudulently. Look for a provider that has been around for a number of years and that offers full transparency on fees, such as Brian Alfred.

When it comes to getting your CIS tax rebate in order, engaging with a qualified accountant or tax advisor is the best way to avoid errors and potentially penalties from HMRC, and make sure any potential refunds are dealt with swiftly and efficiently.

If you would like to read more stories like this, then please click here

The post Tax refunds & Construction Industry Scheme appeared first on UK Construction Online.

New Guidance on Interpreting Exclusion and Limitation Clauses

A recent decision of the English Technology and Construction Court has provided long overdue and important confirmation on how clauses excluding or restricting liability for breach should be interpreted. The decision in Mott MacDonald Ltd v Trant Engineering Ltd¹ is also a timely reminder of the risks of drafting exclusion and limitation of liability clauses, especially when faced with commercial pressures to finalise agreed terms as quickly as possible.

The Facts

Trant Engineering Limited was engaged to construct a new power station at RAF Mount Pleasant and contracted with Mott MacDonald Limited to provide design services. Following initial disputes between the parties, a settlement and services agreement (“SSA”) was entered into which covered the parties’ future actions. The SSA contained three clauses which limited or excluded Mott MacDonald’s liability in the event of a breach: (i) a liability cap, (ii) an exclusions clause, and (iii) a net contribution clause. When Trant failed to pay Mott MacDonald under the SSA, Mott MacDonald issued proceedings against Trant. In defence Trant pleaded that Mott MacDonald had fundamentally, wilfully and deliberately breached the SSA. Mott MacDonald sought summary judgment, contending that even if the alleged breaches were deliberate, the exclusion and restriction clauses applied.

Issues

The key issue before the court was how the exclusion clause in the SSA ought to be interpreted. Although the House of Lords in Photo Production² rejected the doctrine that an exclusion clause will not apply where the party relying on it has been guilty of a fundamental breach, uncertainty remained following that decision. In particular, it was unclear whether it was still presumed that a clause excluding liability for a deliberate, repudiatory breach of contract could only be rebutted where clear language had been used. Notably, two decisions of the High Court reached different conclusions – in Marhedge it was held there was such a presumption³, whereas in AstraZeneca it was held there was not⁴.

Judgement

The court said that where two High Court judgments interpret the law differently, the later decision supersedes the earlier case. The judge was satisfied that the analysis in AstraZeneca was correct – exemption clauses should be interpreted by the normal principles of contractual construction without any presumption that could only be rebutted by the use of clear language. This principle applies regardless of the breach being limited or excluded and regardless of whether it is deliberate or repudiatory.

In this case the liability cap, exclusion clause and net contribution clause were all drafted without carve outs for fundamental, wilful or deliberate breaches. They were drafted in clear terms and were contained in an agreement designed to resolve an existing dispute and to set out a regime governing their further dealings to avoid a renewed dispute.

Although Trant alleged it would have “to redo virtually the entire scope of work under the SSA” because of Mott MacDonald’s fundamental, deliberate and wilful breaches of the SSA, the court upheld the drafting of the SSA. In doing so, they were unwilling to relieve Trant from a bad bargain and so summary judgment was entered against them.

Comment

This is a significant decision demonstrating the English court’s approach to contractual interpretation. The case confirms that the language used by the parties will be the starting point for interpreting the contract, giving weight to the factual, legal and regulatory background and business common sense.

In this case Trant argued there had been insufficient time to verify Mott MacDonald’s future actions under the SSA. The court was unsympathetic to that argument as the SSA had been entered into between two commercial entities with the benefit of professional advice.

Exclusion and limitation of liability clauses are commonplace in many contracts and the case highlights the importance of taking care when drafting such clauses. Issues to consider include:

1. Has clear language been used in the drafting that reflects the parties intentions?
2. How should the risk proposed to be limited be managed and which party should bear that risk?
3. Is it clear from the drafting which risks are being excluded, limited, capped or accepted?
4. What types of losses (if any) should be excluded or limited from the liability clause? Should there be carve outs for contributory negligence or wilful or deliberate breach?
5. How does the exclusion or limitation drafting interact with the other provisions of the contract, such as any indemnity clauses?

The decision in Mott MacDonald v Trant confirms that exclusion and liability clauses will be strictly interpreted and that parties cannot rely on legal presumptions being implied to alter how the clause will be interpreted. The decision highlights the importance of taking early professional advice to ensure the clause reflects the parties’ intentions and is clear. Exclusion and liability clauses will be determined by what they say and the courts will not step in to relieve a party from a bad bargain.

Barry Hembling and Hazel Boland-Shanahan are members of the construction team at Watson, Farley & Williams LLP

[1] [2021] EWHC 754 (TCC).
[2] Photo Production Ltd v Securicor Transport Ltd [1980] AC 827.
[3] Internet Broadcasting Corporation Ltd & others v MAR LLC [2009] EWHC 844 (Ch) (“Marhedge”).
[4] AstraZeneca UK Ltd v Albemarle International Corporation & another [2011] EWHC 1574 (Comm).

If you would like to read more stories like this, then please click here

The post New Guidance on Interpreting Exclusion and Limitation Clauses appeared first on UK Construction Online.

What to Consider if Your Contractor Goes Bust

As a result of the pandemic, we have seen, and advised on, numerous instances where main contractors have downed tools or closed sites. In some cases, this has been a temporary hiatus to construction works as we and our client employers have persuaded or assisted main contractors to return to site. However, we have unfortunately seen occasions where the contractor has gone bust and never returned to site.

If faced with contractor insolvency, we set out below what you need to consider and those matters with which you may need to deal:

1. If you have a funding agreement, notify your funder of the contractor’s situation. Buy yourself some time with your funder to give you breathing space to work out how any outstanding works are to be completed.  Remember that most funding agreements will contain obligations requiring you to provide information (such as news of insolvency) to the funder in a timely fashion.
2. Immediately secure the site and materials on it. Ascertain what you have paid for in full, what is part paid for and what are contractor or sub-contractor assets on site.
3. Prepare a detailed valuation of the works and, if you have one, request the contract administrator to undertake a formal valuation. Ascertain the works to be completed (including any defects not yet rectified), revise any works programme (including ascertaining what is on the critical path), calculate the costs to finalise the works, whether extra funding will be required to finalise them and any disputes about the works already existing.
4. Check insurance coverage and insure the site, the works and check the insurance position in respect of any third party assets to remain on site. The contractor will likely have carried public liability, employers liability, professional indemnity insurance (if providing design) and contractor’s all risk insurance.  These may come to an end with its insolvency or termination of the building contract (see below).  Decide what insurances you will need in place for the future of the project. Also check any insurances you have in place in respect of the project and whether they require you to inform your insurer of the main contractor’s insolvency.
5. Check the contractual documentation:

• Be it a JCT contract, NEC form of contract or bespoke agreements, they should set out provisions for termination on insolvency of the main contractor. Follow the provisions of your contracts to the letter to formally bring your contract with the main contractor to an end, especially where you want to engage a new contractor to finish any works or oversee their completion yourself.
• Is there a parent company guarantee or performance bond you can claim under? Have the trigger events in such agreement occurred?
• Do you have any collateral warranties from subcontractors? These may assist you and give you step in rights to take over vital supply chain contracts.

6. Make immediate checks to ensure that documentation for which the contractor was responsible can be located and is up to date (eg health and safety records, drawings, test certificates, manufacturers’ warranties etc).
7. Unless commercially imperative, do not make any further payments to any party about the works until you know your full position.
8. Decide how any outstanding works are to be completed after formal termination of the main contractor’s contract. Generally, the options will be a new main contractor or the employer or a construction manager to manage the existing or new sub-contractors. Agree a new contract with a new main contractor (likely to be on a cost plus basis) or with a construction manager.
9. Take advice as to whether you have any claims against the main contractor and whether these are commercially worth pursuing.

The first days after a main contractor has entered into some form of insolvency procedure are critical and it will be an intensive time of information gathering and decision making. It is however hoped that you will have seen some of the warning signs that your main contractor may be in difficulty (eg less activity on site, slow or late deliveries, plant or equipment disappearing from site, requests for accelerated payments, programme issues, persistent rumours about the main contractor’s financial position including sub-contractors and suppliers not being paid, late filing or qualified accounts being filed at Companies House and a new evasiveness in communications) before they go bust and you have been able to undertake some pre-planning before their insolvency occurs.

By Ian Timlin of Conexus Law

If you would like to read more stories like this, then please click here

The post What to Consider if Your Contractor Goes Bust appeared first on UK Construction Online.