Extension of Time, Certification Pressure and a Supplier Trip
A consultant is the engineer's representative on a HKD 8.2 million lighting-control replacement in a government building. The contract programme is 26 weeks. The contractor submitted shop drawings for the control panels on 3 June. The contract requires the engineer to respond within 14 days; the response was issued on 24 June as 'approved with comments'. The contractor claims a 21-day extension of time and HKD 180,000 in acceleration costs, saying the late approval delayed panel manufacture. The contractor's own record shows the long-lead controller was ordered 10 days after the date required by its procurement schedule, and the installation activity had five days of total float. The building is due to open, and the project director asks the engineer to issue practical completion certification before the fire-alarm interface test is complete, 'with snagging to follow', and to date it before the opening. The contractor also invites the engineer to a paid weekend trip to Shenzhen to inspect a panel factory.
1. Assess the extension-of-time claim and the acceleration cost. What records and analysis would you require?
Read the worked answer
The contractor is entitled to time only for delay caused by the engineer's late response, not the full 21 days. The contract required a 14-day response; the engineer took 21 days, so seven days are the employer's risk, subject to notice and the delay being critical. The contractor's own late order of the long-lead controller, 10 days after its procurement date, and the five days of float must be assessed. The net critical delay is likely seven days minus any contractor delay that consumed float. The 21-day claim and HKD 180,000 are not justified as presented. Require a time-impact analysis, the order date evidence, the updated critical path, and proof that acceleration was instructed or mitigated. Grant EOT only for the demonstrated critical period; allow costs only if the contract provides and the instruction caused them.
2. How should you respond to the project director's request to certify practical completion and backdate it?
Read the worked answer
Do not certify practical completion before the fire-alarm interface test. Practical completion means the works are complete and fit for purpose; a life-safety interface is not snagging. Certifying and backdating would misrepresent the status and could expose the engineer, employer and occupants to regulatory and insurance risk. Offer a conditional interim certificate only if the contract allows it, with a clear list of outstanding items, a dated completion plan, and written acceptance by the employer and fire authority. Record your advice in writing. If the project director insists, escalate to the employer's authorised representative and state that you cannot sign a false certificate. Professional registration and the HKIE code require honesty and public safety, and a false certificate can also breach the contract.
3. How should you handle the paid weekend trip to the supplier's factory?
Read the worked answer
Decline the paid weekend trip, or accept only if it is a legitimate factory inspection with a clear business purpose, approved in writing by your employer, and the cost is borne by the employer or reimbursed at standard rates. A supplier-funded weekend trip creates a conflict of interest, especially while you are evaluating that supplier's panel. If you attend, disclose the invitation and any hospitality in the project record, and do not let it influence approval. Better: arrange a joint inspection with the contractor and client, or ask the supplier to provide a video and test certificates. If the trip is offered as an inducement, report it under your firm's gifts policy and decline. The test is whether a reasonable observer would think your judgement could be bought.