Practical Post 12: “architects only” club?

by Bregs Blog admin team


Practical Post 12: Public Sector restrictive practices: an “architect only” club?

We were appointed architects for a job under public procurement (local authority project). We’ve now been asked to also be Certifiers for the project and to negotiate a new fee for the new roles.

The original tender notice told me exactly what was required and I priced my bid accordingly. This time round, I do not know how many inspections are required, what paperwork I will have to produce, what expertise I will have to buy in or what additional PI cover (to certify the other consultants) I need to get. I don’t even know what contract I will be asked to sign. And all of this will be done behind closed doors with no competitive tendering. If the RIAI estimate of hours are correct this new role could cost as much as the first fee again.

Surely this will be open to legal challenge from someone else who objects to me getting exclusive access to make a private deal? I am very concerned that this job and methods of procurement may be questioned later on, with my current appointment being overturned and placed back out for public tender. I do not want to scale up and employ more staff with this risk hanging over the practice’s head.

How can this be allowed under the public procurement rules?

Attached: extract off typical public sector procurement guidelines (jpeg and pdf) : Tender Addendum – TR Clause 1.6

Tender Addendum - TR Clause 1.6


Other Posts in this series:

Practical Post 1: BC(A)R SI.9 Extensions & Refurbishments– click link here

Practical Post 2: completion- FAO Vintners & Retailers– click link here

Practical posts 3: Change of Use – FDI and offices – Click link here

Practical post 4: What if the builder goes bust?– Click link here

Practical Post 5: Small retail extension- problem with certifier – Click link here

Practical Post 6: no one wants to do certifier roles! – Click link here

Practical Post 7: Existing Shopping Centres – Click link here

Practical Post 8: Employees won’t certify: BC(A)R SI.9 – Click link here

Practical Post 9: Fees & numbers of inspections?: BC(A)R SI.9 – Click link here

Practical Post 10: No retrospective compliance: BC(A)R SI.9 – Click link here

Practical Post 11: Phasing and BC(A)R SI.9? – Click link here

Practical Post 10: No retrospective compliance: BC(A)R SI.9 – Click link here

Practical Post 11: Phasing and BC(A)R SI.9? – Click link here

Practical Post 13: Duties & conflicts- BC(A)R SI.9 –  Click link here

Practical Post 14: Supervision vs Inspection –  Click link here

Practical post 15: Code of conduct issues –  Click link here

Practical Post 16: Pyrite and certification? – Click link here

Practical Post 17: Off-License fit-out –  Click link here

Practical Post 18- material alterations: Creche  – Click link here

Practical Post 19: Phased completion & BC(A)R SI.9 –  Click link here

Practical post 20: Are builders off the hook with BCAR? – click link here

NOTE: This series of posts is not meant to undermine or be in opposition to any professional advice from registered representative bodies: rather it is to offer additional technical aids to those that find themselves in the unenviable position of having to deal with SI.9 in it’s current form at present. As with all information posted on the Blog we urge all practitioners to check with their respective professional bodies before assuming any roles or duties under Building Control (Amendment) regulation (SI.9 of 2014). We hope to post a number of these practical posts and list in one area, so home owners, SME’s and professionals can drop in and click on a particular topic to get summary information that may be useful to them while working within these new and difficult regulations.