Page 18 - 8_PBC to Begg OCR_8-4-16 (38pp)

derided by Mrs Hillgarth for being inappropriately comprehensive and in her opinion we should do as normal and have one main contractor as in previous decades.
One of the most ignorant and ill-informed decisions on record due totally to her inability to comprehend that if artisans are well managed there is no reason to contract with one main contractor who firstly loads all sub-contractors by a minimum 35% [yes, proved conclusively to Mrs Hillgarth but brushed aside as not important] and are generally simply that, contractors hiring anybody for what is on the whole simply minimum wage manual labour. There is not much skill required nor industry qualification required to paint a wall/ceiling – just experience and good quality brushes hopefully. There is no skill nor qualification required to clean a floor – just good(ish) equipment [which can be hired anyway].
The rest is history and comprehensively described above somewhere. The internals budget rose from £27,000 to £35,000 to Wade’s quote from Mrs Hillgarth of eventually only £48,974 (which did include a super duper floor renovation, which if stripped out and only a regular clean reduced to approx. £40,000.
I cannot recall, but I’m sure Mrs Hillgarth can confirm, if Wade were happy to only do the reduced Internals for £40,000 but not the Externals for a mind blowing £170,000 odd
It’s perfectly normal from contractors with budgets of this size to rely on getting both projects as opposed to cherry picking just one, but I will stand corrected.
In the Service Charge Annual Accounts which you sent to leaseholders on 8 June 2015 you say: “As regards the recent external/internal works, Reserves utilised amounted to £105,877 against the agreed Works (Exterior & Interior) budget of £105,019 set [out] in the Section 20 Notice dated 22nd June 2014 – copy attached”. However the Section 20 Notice dated 22nd June 2014 to which you refer contains no indication of the “agreed Works” against which the named contractors were quoting. In relation to the “Internals Only” quote from MHML for £25,000 you say, with studied ambiguity: “This internals (only) quote does not include some items of others, but is still adequately extensive”.
This is very confused again.
Management [me] spent hours doing the various analyses of each and every tender, including re-doing once Mrs Hillgarth presented her Wade quote [in fact she arranged two quotes]
The Surveyor’s Schedule of Works had a reference (eg: xyz_ 1 etc) against each item of works.
I produced an analysis with these codes in the left column of an Excel.doc [in colour...] with each contractor’s tender costings, including eventually Wade’s, in adjacent columns so it was so easy to identify that Contractor (a) was charging £10 for (xyz_ 1 etc), Contractor (b) £8.50 etc etc