To QS or not to QS?

[Fi and J]

We have planning for a self build w formative budget 520k, hopefully events in Middle East won’t derail this beyond recognition. QS (who is local) is asking for approx 10k incl vat to go through detailed design, tender analysis and contract review. Architect suggests she can populate formative cost document to get to tender thus saving this 10k. Is skipping QS at this stage likely to save money or lose money later? 
 

thank you for your wisdom! 

[Mike]

A lot depends on how you plan to get the work done. If you want a single contractor to do everything (or everything up to a defined point - e.g. leaving you decorating), then having a good local QS on board to run a tender (and to oversee the ongoing contract financially) is often a good move. If you plan to split the work into different elements that you (or your site manager) will be coordinating, then you may well be dealing with smaller contractors who may not be used to pricing work that way.

 

See my comments here (and the thread in general) for more.

[Nickfromwales]

1 hour ago, Fi and J said:

We have planning for a self build w formative budget 520k, hopefully events in Middle East won’t derail this beyond recognition. QS (who is local) is asking for approx 10k incl vat to go through detailed design, tender analysis and contract review. Architect suggests she can populate formative cost document to get to tender thus saving this 10k. Is skipping QS at this stage likely to save money or lose money later? 
 

thank you for your wisdom! 

Who is principal contractor? 
 

It’s their role to do due diligence and help you reach out for costs, with tenders.

[Fi and J]

7 hours ago, Nickfromwales said:

Who is principal contractor? 
 

It’s their role to do due diligence and help you reach out for costs, with tenders.

Thanks -  pc will be established at tender. PD is architect. They’ve got a few builders in mind but they insist a tender w 3 builders is best approach. 

[marmic]

totally agree with other comments and yes does depend how you are going to manage your project.  I'd also suggest due diligence on the QS too before committing!  And how far will they go - if simply a detailed cost plan but not procurement it gives you a target which is good and can prevent overspend (if figures realistic) but still leaves a lot of work.  We didn't have a accurate budget in advance (although my numbers tunred out to be about right) -   there were some unknowns and was very difficult obtaining realistic figures for some packages in advance - this is where a decent PQS could help significantly.   If you plan to project manage and split packages etc procurement, detailed due diligence, project management is very time consuming and the biggest challenge  - in fact way more than I had assumed and I work in the industry, and your budget is double what ours was! And don't forget cdm/insurance etc.  So glad we're now almost finished!  We couldn't have afforded a principal contractor but would have been nice! (if they had followed spec etc and not cut corners to increase margins!).  It's often going to be the case that 'it's only you that cares 110%'.  Don't get me wrong there are some great people, companies, and products out there - it's finding them!  I'm happy we made the right choices overall, but still had minor issues albeit nothing that couldn't be corrected/overcome.

 

My employed job is on the other side of the fence. I work for [an honest] specialist sub-contractor and UK agent for a handful of manufacturers with the QS/PQS often being 'the customer' - I know for a fact it's not uncommon that if they are obtaining market quotes to give them confidence on some costs they just look at the numbers and don't dig deep to ensure complaince with spec and client getting true value for money.  With some packages (not all before somebody shoots me down) it's not unusual for suppliers of various products to white label/rebrand - which can be fine, but be careful. For example in my day job one of our competitors buys from 3 manufacturers for one of their product ranges. All 3 products are rebranded under the same code/name and they claim they are the manufactuer (no transparency even on as builts/O&M) -  but these 3 products for example are very very different in terms of quality, how they are built/operate, performance, safety, sustainability inc longevity etc. On paper with limited description they can be described as the same product however - they decide what to supply based on cost agreed/margin, and we know for a fact also regularly provide lower performance than what has been bought (to be more competitive or increase profit). They are very good at this and are selective to avoid being caught out!  Sorry going into one now but be careful how you spend.   The assumption is so often that everyone is honest and if something is said it must be true.  Caveat emptor!     

 

ah that feels better 😀🤣

[saveasteading]

27 minutes ago, marmic said:

look at the numbers and don't dig deep 

Indeed. Numbers are their thing. My main issue is when they select the cheapest quite without reviewing the others properly: the headline price msy not be the best after exclusions, management  and quality are considered.

Conversely, when they want one to win and the others are being used as checks.

 

You need a waste strategy too, unless they are supplying all the materials and paying for disposal, you will waste masses....paying to buy surplus and then throw it.

 

You don't need 3 quotes for everything. You need one good quote, by whatever means, and recommendation is best.

[marmic]

24 minutes ago, saveasteading said:

Conversely, when they want one to win and the others are being used as checks.

dare I say brown envelopes - forgot to add that to my rant 😁

[marmic]

ps - worth having certainty on architects fees too such as % of final build costs etc.  We did talk to a couple with a view to easing the pressure but decided the cost (inc early stage risk if planning refused) was simply too high and decided do everything ourselves from planning to completion (although not quite finished yet) - fortunately I have sufficient construction industry knowledge, and where I didn't have answers I made sure to establish the facts. Yes more time but has been worthwhile.  I work with architects on a daily basis and have utmost respect for the majority, but not all.  As a potential self-build client with financial limits I would also need to ensure they listen and understand brief as some will like spending your money and telling you what to do!  And again careful due diligence on who you use.

eg. a recent planning application we had to object to by an architect acting as agent for client had errors including deliberate lies, lacked important info, some info 'hidden' and is so far removed from policies it should be refused. Clearly had lots of copy/paste text and design. I'd not have been happy had I been the client, particuarly given the likely fees..  Albeit on the flipside wouldn't surpise me if it gets approved with #### planning departments and current government!

[saveasteading]

33 minutes ago, marmic said:

wouldn't surpise me if it gets approved with #### planning departments and current government!

Ummm. Planners follow tick-boxes and policy. Central government not involved and we don't do politics here.

Local councillors can be an issue as they have power but little or no training.

 

36 minutes ago, marmic said:

architects fees too such as % of final build costs etc.  

Everything is negotiable so the contract can be based on work involved and an overview of the cost level, but then fixed.

[marmic]

57 minutes ago, saveasteading said:

Everything is negotiable

absolutely - life in general 😀

[marmic]

59 minutes ago, saveasteading said:

Ummm. Planners follow tick-boxes and policy. Central government not involved and we don't do politics here.

Local councillors can be an issue as they have power but little or no training.

oops on the politics! apologies all.

 

So being PC following contains no names/council/party/gender/location etc:

 

Agree they are meant to and should follow the tick boxes and policy.  Sometimes good / sometimes not (as with some building regs too but that's another debate!). and 110% concur on comment about councillors.  I attended a parish council meeting recently and there happened to be a county councillor present to provide an update on a few things. This person is involved in planning and on planning committee and another councillor present suggested this person was a planning expert! (which i know for a fact is clearly not the case as was involved in our advice stage and application early on and didn't have a clue and was quite rude about us - we were copied into an email we shouldn't have been, which was also about somebody else too!). Back to the meeting - I was given permission to speak and addressed councillor directly and politely asked why they didn't follow policy including their own local ones as there's been a number of applications approved that clearly shouldn't have been based on policy - and that's just some I'm aware of.  Talk about put on the spot -  just got waffle about pressure from central government and balance.  When ours went through we had to follow policy - which is fine, and we also provided massive BNG which we wanted to anyway. ok exemptions now and times change but policy still current, but they seem now to be ticking boxes other than policy!