25th March 2011, 03:43 PM
I don?t think that it follows Sith, particularly for archaeology matters rather than somebody fell over my mattock. Have a disclaimer noting the limitation of a dba or note that the purpose of a watching brief being to find something for which provision had not been made.
What intrigues me about having PI is that client in your model might be looking to get the PI to pay for the archaeology. If you were invited into to some bodies house and they then said you cant come in here unless you show me your PI you would want to know why, write the risk assessment and charge them for it? I suspect that the cost of the PI would be commensurate with the risk. You ring up your insurance company and say the client seems very interested in your PI and they would up your premiums.
So what the developer should first do is say I want archaeologists who have got PI and then I want them to say something stupid like the named archaeologist ?guarantees? that there is absolutely no potential archaeology here that will delay your development. Archaeology then delays the development archaeologists charges for the archaeology, developer claims back the costs from the insurance nice little scam, or is it that the developer charges for the delays caused by the archaeology-archaeology which they own. Surely the developer should insure against unforeseen delays and presumably their insurance premiums are reduced if they attempt to reduce the delays by managing the archaeology.
Moreno- great this is the first example I have ever heard of, is there any public record of this case. somehow the incorrect ground levels lead to an excavation- how ? and what consultant caused it ? is that you indivisible man hows it going
What intrigues me about having PI is that client in your model might be looking to get the PI to pay for the archaeology. If you were invited into to some bodies house and they then said you cant come in here unless you show me your PI you would want to know why, write the risk assessment and charge them for it? I suspect that the cost of the PI would be commensurate with the risk. You ring up your insurance company and say the client seems very interested in your PI and they would up your premiums.
So what the developer should first do is say I want archaeologists who have got PI and then I want them to say something stupid like the named archaeologist ?guarantees? that there is absolutely no potential archaeology here that will delay your development. Archaeology then delays the development archaeologists charges for the archaeology, developer claims back the costs from the insurance nice little scam, or is it that the developer charges for the delays caused by the archaeology-archaeology which they own. Surely the developer should insure against unforeseen delays and presumably their insurance premiums are reduced if they attempt to reduce the delays by managing the archaeology.
Moreno- great this is the first example I have ever heard of, is there any public record of this case. somehow the incorrect ground levels lead to an excavation- how ? and what consultant caused it ? is that you indivisible man hows it going
Reason: your past is my past