It was suggested that a brick test be constructed to a similar project nearby however no date was given of when this should be complete and we assumed prior to commencement of the brickwork would suffice, 3 month prior to commencement of the brickwork we discovered an inconsistency between the brick specified and the drawings, we sent an EWN regarding this. The Project Manager therefore had to change the brick specification which took 8 months, this subsequently has delayed us in meeting our completion date for brickwork scope and was on the critical path, moving out all activities. There are no amendments to clause 80 in terms of risk re design, the Project Manager however has rejected our CEQ (we received a PMI changing the works information after 6 different brick panels were built and an alternative brick spec was chosen) based on the premise that if we had built a test panel 8 months prior to commencing brickwork when received the email to build a panel similar to another project this would have provided sufficient time for them to chose an alternative.
My opinion is , design is employer's risk under clause 80, the Project Manager is the only one who has jurisdiction to change the works info, the time for the test panel is not clearly defined and therefore 63.8 would apply. The Project Manager is also in breach by not making a valid assessment as he has also not made any reference to clause 62.3 and 63.1 of the NEC conditions of contract and his response is merely a biased subjective interpretation.
My opinion is , design is employer's risk under clause 80, the Project Manager is the only one who has jurisdiction to change the works info, the time for the test panel is not clearly defined and therefore 63.8 would apply. The Project Manager is also in breach by not making a valid assessment as he has also not made any reference to clause 62.3 and 63.1 of the NEC conditions of contract and his response is merely a biased subjective interpretation.