PM advice

[GlynM]

Hi, I'm shortly commencing works to knock down and rebuild my bungalow. I've organised demolition and have decided to go for a supply and erect timber frame package from a specialist company. I'm just waiting on the loadings for my engineer to finalise the ground engineering and I'll be looking for a ground worker to act as the sole contractor to complete drainage and groundworks up to slab. I've also ordered windows on a supply and fix basis.

 

I feel comfortable placing these packages but I'm working full time and as much as I'd like to be on site and PM the works, I need to earn to keep the project going. I've therefore been looking at employing a local PM who can gather tenders for the internal packages and oversee on site, he's also an tradesman so can complete some of the works himself (or assist others). I've met him a couple of times and seen some of the work he's done, which is good and as this is a low energy house, he is also experienced in this field so understands things like the integrity of the airtightness layer.

 

He's suggested a fee to complete the tender packages of the trades, and then a % fee on top of each as his fee for overseeing and coordinating works. I'm not sure this works as his incentive to lower the price of trade packages isn't there in this case so I've debated either looking to agree a fixed fee for a programme, an agreed rate (although this could snowball) or a method where I share my budget cost, agree a fee with him and then a cut of any savings below my budget as an incentive for him to obtain best value?

 

I wonder if anyone has looked at something similar or has a view on what would a fair fee/ best route for this type of role?    

[lizzie]

Be very careful.....I had a pm who was on an hourly rate.  We had a TF/slab package.  We had one groundworker for all up to slab.Windows were on a supply and fix, the rest of the work was on quote/tender.

 

All sounds good.....its laughable, the cost overruns were massive. The ground work contractor caused no end of problems but for some reason wasn't sacked ( I sacked him myself in the end) and his costs were way more than expected......and so it went on.

 

We had an awful lot of problems.  We found out later that PM had not been straight with us and was working for Tf company and so he was reluctant to raise issues (major ones too) with them  as it would impact on his job with them so we the customer suffered.  It appears that ethos followed through on other elements of the build when clearly contractors who were not up to it should have been sacked but were not (unless I did it).  There was an element of price differential too.......you can draw your own conclusions there.

 

He was supposed to be an independent PM but pushed us toward a TF company we had previously rejected for various reasons.  I felt bad that the really nice salesman we had dealt with and rejected did not get anything from our sale as PM got credit....of course we had no idea we were not getting independent advice and were being steered into something because it suited him and his income.  Whilst I am not unhappy with TF co I am very unhappy at deceit by PM who if he had said on day 1 or even day 51 that he worked (or was trying to get himself a permanent job on back of our project) for TF co too then that would have been Ok with us and at least we would have been aware of why things were ignored and not dealt with properly.  He put us in a situation that the mistakes made at the start impacted on the whole build right through second fix and beyond.

 

We did have some reference for him and he seemed very competent at the start but good patter to novices can seem that there is nothing to worry about.

 

I wish we had gone about it a different way now.  There was no option for fixed price, the hourly rate billing was a killer of course but to be fair I dont think the hours charged were that bad its just what was and was not done in those hours and that he was being paid twice for some elements unknown to us.

 

For us the biggest issue (beyond the construction problems) was the lack of trust and confidence once we found out what had been going on.  We were at a stage where we just needed to get to sign off and get rid asap so had to grit our teeth, minimise involvement (I was doing most stuff myself by then) and get to the end of a bad situation.

 

Sorry for the long response but it is not that I feel sorry for myself (I did but that has passed) but to show just how toxic the PM situation can become.

[the_r_sole]

.

Edited September 26, 2019 by the_r_sole

[nod]

45 minutes ago, lizzie said:

Be very careful.....I had a pm who was on an hourly rate.  We had a TF/slab package.  We had one groundworker for all up to slab.Windows were on a supply and fix, the rest of the work was on quote/tender.

 

All sounds good.....its laughable, the cost overruns were massive. The ground work contractor caused no end of problems but for some reason wasn't sacked ( I sacked him myself in the end) and his costs were way more than expected......and so it went on.

 

We had an awful lot of problems.  We found out later that PM had not been straight with us and was working for Tf company and so he was reluctant to raise issues (major ones too) with them  as it would impact on his job with them so we the customer suffered.  It appears that ethos followed through on other elements of the build when clearly contractors who were not up to it should have been sacked but were not (unless I did it).  There was an element of price differential too.......you can draw your own conclusions there.

 

He was supposed to be an independent PM but pushed us toward a TF company we had previously rejected for various reasons.  I felt bad that the really nice salesman we had dealt with and rejected did not get anything from our sale as PM got credit....of course we had no idea we were not getting independent advice and were being steered into something because it suited him and his income.  Whilst I am not unhappy with TF co I am very unhappy at deceit by PM who if he had said on day 1 or even day 51 that he worked (or was trying to get himself a permanent job on back of our project) for TF co too then that would have been Ok with us and at least we would have been aware of why things were ignored and not dealt with properly.  He put us in a situation that the mistakes made at the start impacted on the whole build right through second fix and beyond.

 

We did have some reference for him and he seemed very competent at the start but good patter to novices can seem that there is nothing to worry about.

 

I wish we had gone about it a different way now.  There was no option for fixed price, the hourly rate billing was a killer of course but to be fair I dont think the hours charged were that bad its just what was and was not done in those hours and that he was being paid twice for some elements unknown to us.

 

For us the biggest issue (beyond the construction problems) was the lack of trust and confidence once we found out what had been going on.  We were at a stage where we just needed to get to sign off and get rid asap so had to grit our teeth, minimise involvement (I was doing most stuff myself by then) and get to the end of a bad situation.

 

Sorry for the long response but it is not that I feel sorry for myself (I did but that has passed) but to show just how toxic the PM situation can become.

Ouch 

Tradesmen watch out 

You will be so on it with your next project 

knowing what you are looking at is more than half the battle 

[Ralph]

1 hour ago, GlynM said:

I wonder if anyone has looked at something similar or has a view on what would a fair fee/ best route for this type of role?    

I've been round the houses with this a few times. In the end we have decided that as we are both working full time we're going to go with a central contractor and our architect is handling the tenders.

 

It's more expensive and not the way I wanted to go when we started on this. However, we've had a few false starts and have pissed away way too much time. I now just want the bloody thing built.

[ToughButterCup]

44 minutes ago, nod said:

[...]You will be so on it with your next project  knowing what you are looking at is more than half the battle 

 

 ... except in the new scenario, there will be different problems to solve. Problems unique to that new build. Where I (for one) won't know what I'm looking at. But I will know some of what I'm looking at: more than I did a few years ago.

Research points out that expert status occurs at around 50,000 hours' experience on top of formal qualifications / training. 

 

Be dead by then

 

33 minutes ago, Ralph said:

[...] However, we've had a few false starts and have pissed away way too much time. I now just want the bloody thing built.

 

I agree. There's a huge push to get it done quickly. And that means errors. I'll have the rest of my life to look at those.

It's a marathon this job, not a sprint.

[Oldsteel]

I am at the decision point for main contractor vs PM. I had wanted to go PM having gone main contractor on my last build and had a few issues, but looking at the comments here it seems the dangers of choosing the wrong PM are just as severe as the dangers of choosing the wrong main contractor. In all cases I intend to take up references by talking to previous employers, and keep my options open. If I find a good PM or a good builder that I am confident can do the job I will go with them. In my area though it does seem there are many more builders than PMs to choose from.

[GlynM]

Thanks all for your views, I've checked references from past jobs and have narrowed the scope so hopefully reducing any risk, which means I'll need to do a bit more myself, but hopefully I can find the right balance between these.