Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jul 2005
You only have to buy it once.
In fact, you don't even have to do that. The Conditions of Contract are free to use, in the sense that to use it, you don't have to own a copy (although it would be foolish not to). You just have to agree to accept a fee for doing some work(thereby concluding a Contract in law) on the basis of these Conditions of Contract.
Of course, it is helpfult to know what is in the Conditions of Contract sufficiently well to know what you are signing up to, otherwise you really are buying a pig in a poke.
1man1desk
to let, fully furnished
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2004
Surely for each contract (job) you should buy 2 (if not 3) copies: one each for the Employer and the Contractor to sign, and possibly one for you as Consultant. Certainly is it possible and not uncommon to proceed on a letter of intent as all the (other) contract documents will refer to the Form of Contract, but one really should have original copies of the Forms of Contract and all con docs signed by both parties and with all/any amendments initialed.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Oct 2006
IMan There is a possiblity that there might be some self incrimination with the answer for some? If it was me I would keep right out of signing any contract, leave that to the principles.
The solution to the Principle-Agent problem in the oil exploration industry, where the developer is most certainly desperate to find oil and is worried that the agents might cheat them, is that the consultant, often referred to as a Bird Dog, is present through out the period of the fieldwork with the team. They are there to get the maximum product at the highest quality. Are there any examples of this in British consultant archaeology?
Quote:quote:Many a time I had a contractor applying for an 'extension of time' on the grounds of weather when in fact condditions were adverse, but not exceptioannly so.
where were you.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2006
[quote]Originally posted by Unitof1
The solution to the Principle-Agent problem in the oil exploration industry, where the developer is most certainly desperate to find oil and is worried that the agents might cheat them, is that the consultant, often referred to as a Bird Dog, is present through out the period of the fieldwork with the team. They are there to get the maximum product at the highest quality. Are there any examples of this in British consultant archaeology?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
National Grid have had consultants on their payroll on a number of projects to watch the main works contractors archaeologists to ensure that the undertakings in the ES were abided by and that the budgets were being kept to. Does that count?
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Oct 2006
Certainly would appear to.
Is this a model that is used elsewhere. Is there some consultancy which does this type of work. Most of the time that I have come across consultants they were part of the clients team who prepared the eias/es/wsi/mitigation so had an interest in things like where the watching briefs took place/evaluations/excavations and often had a previous history and future contracts with that client. Did the tendering field archaeologists get any say in who the monitors would be?
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2006
Not sure if it has been used elsewhere. No, the tendering field archaeologists didn't get any say in who the monitors would be.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jul 2005
Posted by Invisible Man:
Quote:quote:Surely for each contract (job) you should buy 2 (if not 3) copies: one each for the Employer and the Contractor to sign, and possibly one for you as Consultant.
No - the documents are just books; you need to know their content and refer to them, but you can apply the Conditions of Contract just by referring to them in a letter or by signing the Form of Agreement, for which a template is provided; you don't need to actually sign a copy of the book itself.
Generally, anyone wanting to use these Conditions of Contract is advised to buy one copy (the cost of which you can build into your price) and refer to it in the agreement you sign with your client.
The Client and Consultant will both also need copies - but they will generally have them long before the Contract is even put out to tender, and again they only ever need one copy.
1man1desk
to let, fully furnished
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Oct 2006
No reason then why the ifa cannot put a copy of the contract and its notes on the web.
old girl these national grid consultants did they stay with the digging teams or were they consultants working for national grid as in, in their payroll. There presumably was a landowner and curator also involved?
I have always wished that the landowner had got me involved in this (nothing against NA by the way)
http://www.revolt.co.uk/news90.html
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2006
They were on the grid payroll. Curators involved as DTI consultees. The way it worked was:
A number of curators involved who were involved with the scoping of the ES, approval of an over-arching archaeological framework and approving WSIs, monitoring fieldwork etc for pre- and post submission fieldwork.
Fieldwork managed by consultants to the main works contractors who oversaw the field units doing the work.
NG archaeologist(s) keeping an eye on what was going on to make sure that the work agreed was undertaken to the agreed standard and to budget, or able to discuss with N Grid why if it was going over-budget (e.g. when more archaeology/ more complex archaeology was found than anticipated).
Landowners - there was some involvement of the NG archaeologists with some landowners, particularly with regard to important/interesting finds in order to discuss release of those finds to the relevent museums. Mostly handled by the main works contractor's consultant though.
Don't know if that helps?
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Oct 2006
So there are NG archaeologists as well as an engineering contractor working for NG who employ their own Consultant arch
So two sets of ....making sure that the field crew do whats best for NG
Oh and a curator who should be doing TCPA for district authorities but is moonlighting for the DTi. Yes I am familiar with the stitch up.
In terms of the Principle Agent problem is that NG are not the principles as far as wanting archaeology. The curators/dti/landowners presumably are.
A better case would be if the curators/dti/landowners were to employ a consultant to monitor the works and a better one still would be if the landowners appointed their own archaeologists.
