The Government first announced plans for a shared ownership right to buy in October 2019. At the time the sector raised concerns about the impact the plans would have on housing associations ability to borrow. An election and a pandemic later the Government announced, during the CIH Housing Festival last week, the return of the right to shared ownership as part of its Affordable Homes Programme (AHP).
In the third part of our series on contract management pitfalls, we look at the risks and opportunities presented by instructing changes under construction contracts.
Construction contracts will often contain mechanisms under which ‘changes’ or ‘variations’ can be instructed to the scope of works being delivered by a contractor, or the working conditions in which the works are delivered. There are many reasons why social housing providers may find it necessary to issue change instructions, and this can be a very useful mechanism. For instance, where additional works have been identified as being necessary following detailed surveys of properties, or where new property stock has been purchased and the new properties are to be included in the scope of works.
Instructing a change to the scope of works or working conditions does carry a number of risks, and we commonly see disputes arising out of change instructions. In our experience, there are two key themes:
- Is the change clear?
Change instructions need to be very clear as to what is being changed in the contractor’s scope of works, ensuring that both contractor and employer understand the extent of the change. Disputes often arise because the full consequences of the change has not been documented, or the parties had a conflicting understanding of what the change instruction meant.
- Are the time and cost consequences agreed?
A change instruction will often entitle the contractor to additional time and cost, and it is of little surprise that many disputes relate to the extent of the additional time and cost due to the contractor. It is best practice to set out the full extent of the time and cost consequences in the change instruction, so that all parties are clear as to what additional payment will be made.
When used properly, change instructions can be a useful mechanism allowing social housing providers to react to fluctuations in their housing stock and address new construction needs as they are identified. That being said, there are risks associated with instructing changes, and those risks can be managed through carefully documenting the change, and the time and cost consequences.
We regularly deliver training to social housing providers in relation to instructing changes, contract management risks, and dispute resolution.
For more information
Two final pieces of the possession jigsaw have been published on 15 September 2020. Mr Justice Knowles’ working group on possession proceedings has issued its guidance on the “overall arrangements” for possession proceedings.
One change proposed by the Building Safety Bill is the introduction of a duty holder regime, which will see statutory responsibility for the safety of higher risk buildings placed on key individuals
Throughout this pandemic, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) has been publishing various “Statements on Coronavirus” (Statements) which provide guidance on consumer rights during this time.
A recent increase in COVID-19 cases in the UK means new measures are being put in place in an effort to reduce the risk of a second wave. Whilst the impact of COVID-19 continues to be felt, it is important to remain focused on the sector’s road to recovery.
Sometimes half an hour at a conference gives you the reality that has been staring you in the face all along. That was my experience watching “Change is on the Horizon”
Following our recent e-briefing on Possession Notices, Helen Tucker and Emilie Pownall from our housing litigation team discuss the impact of the changes on social landlords.
Not only has the possession stay been extended until 20 September, the notice periods to be given to tenants has been extended in certain circumstances with some important exceptions.
The Court has confirmed that a party cannot withhold its consent in order to re-write the original bargain.
Following the Grenfell Tower tragedy, building safety continues to be a key concern for social housing providers and their residents.
To receive invitations to our events, as well as information and articles on legal issues and sector developments that are of interest to you, please sign up to Newsroom.