The Client entered into a subcontract to install cladding on a development (the Site), with fixed start and completion dates. The Main Contractor repeatedly failed to strike and re-erect scaffolding correctly, delayed installation of windows and seal fittings, and obstructed access to key areas. By November, only part of the ground-floor cladding and a fraction of the projecting bays were complete.
The Main Contractor has issued delay notices attributing all programme overruns to the Client and threatening liquidated damages under the subcontract. The Client has not yet served any formal extension-of-time claim or documented the Contractor’s role in the delays. Lack of precise dates, written instructions, and variation valuations risks an adverse finding that the Client abandoned works.
Counsel advised the client to document precise dates and communications from its site team showing when scaffold, window and sealing works prevented progress; to quantify the remaining cladding scope and any extra labour and variation costs; to serve a formal extension-of-time notice under clause 14.1 detailing each delay and its impact; and to issue a concise response challenging the delay notices, asserting entitlement to both the extended time and associated variation payments while expressly reserving all rights.
Call us – Mon-Fri 8:30am – 6:30pm
+44 (0) 20 3034 0077
By submitting this form, I accept this website’s Privacy Policy