Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

Reed up on?

Letters

Colin Reed seems surprised by the decision of his clients to do without designer supervision on site. What other outcome could he expect when giving a simplistic answer to a complex question?

What he should have told his client is that reducing the level of supervision on site leads to dramatically increased costs as a result of delayed or even broken lines of communication. What is more, there is a likely increase in health and safety risks which should put the client in direct line for prosecution if he has declined to pay for supervision.

I would go further and say that if the ICE conditions of contract do not demand the presence of a designer's representative on site, then the Institution itself is culpable in this sorry state of affairs. If the requirement is struck out by the men with sharp pencils then they should have no doubt that the finger of blame will be pointed at them.

It is not professional to duck these issues and to give weak direction to strong clients. If we behave in a nonprofessional way we cannot expect to be treated or paid as professionals.

Bill Harvey, 85 Pennsylvania Road, Exeter, EX4 6DW

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions. Please note comments made online may also be published in the print edition of New Civil Engineer. Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.