Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By AHS
We used to charge 1 percent of the project value for PS but finding we are being undercut any comments would be appreciated either here or by email.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Merv Newman
1% of the contract sounds a bit high for me and could easily be undercut. I would prefer a day-rate which also covers office and administrative work and a share of normal business expenses.
How many days on-site, in the office, travelling ? Then add a decent margin and VAT.
We indicate, based on the above, broadly how we calculate or fees (DR+miles+living expenses)
Contract should include an ESTIMATE of charges to the client plus "additional work will be billed on the same basis"
Merv
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Bruce Sutherland
I spoke to APS last week - they will not be updating their fee scales until enough people have carried out the revised role - bit of a chicken and egg - ie we need some guidance to price but understandably so that they have transparency on their fee scale model they need real fee!
Some people have suggested that it will be up to 3x as much - looks like you will just have to risk it out like the rest of us.....
Merv's idea of day rate is very nice but the majority of this work is carried out in our experience on a percentage basis - like most other professionals in the industry
Cheers
Bruce
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By AHS
More feedback would greatly be appreciated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By B J Mann
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. But I thought there were two reasons for the new regs being brought out.
Wasn't one because CDM had become a bureacratic nightmare and they wanted to cut down on the amount of unneccessary paperwork?
And wasn't the other that there was confusion over roles and responsibilities and duplication of effort and they wanted to clarify responsibilities and reduce duplication of effort?
So surely fees should go down?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By MAK
Some PS/CDM-C contracts and fee percentages are worked on a sliding value basis.
For example - possibly 1% might be deemed acceptable for a smaller value project of £30k, whereas 0.25% may be deemed sufficient for a larger value project i.e £10 million.
These figures are not taken from real-life examples but intended as examples only.
The argument for the changeable fee value was that same scope of service was traditionally required, after the intial preconstruction, review construction plan (on behalf of the client) was complete there was deemed to be no significant increase in work required, i.e in comparison to the percentage of input/output the designers and contractor have.
So at some point there will be a fee scale agreement for framework clients which gives the approximate percentage fee expected for a set range of project value. i.e PS fee to be 1% applicable for projects construction budget £25k to £35k.
This may require to be altered on what form the scope of service for the CDM-C takes i.e client duty to manage the project throughout its duration under Reg 9, could arguably be translated to employ the CDM-C to undertake additional duties in terms of audits, health and safety reviews etc. Just a thought.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By peter gotch
B J.
If to achieve less bureaucracy, hopefully CDM-Cs will do less cut and paste and more thinking about what should and shouldn't be communicated.
More time thinking could drive fees upwards.
Regards, Peter
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Mike Draper
While it is possible that the CDM-C fees may rise, as they will have to actually do some serious work, everyone else's costs should drop as they will not have to read reams of paper to find the one page that means anything to them.
By reducing the bureacracy, it should reduce the total overhead for the project.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.