Popwerpoint from the Owners meeting at St Peter's Church in Edinburgh on 6th December 2011 about statutory notice issues with the City of Edinburgh Council

1. An open evening
for the
Edinburgh Residents for Statutory Notice Reform
Facebook group
7th December 2011

2. Introductions

3. Gordon Murdie
MD, Quantus QS
BBC Scotland Investigates
“Scotland’s Property Scandal”
Expert QS

5. Meeting with Peter Long; interim manager
Property and Conservation
Building bridges or a bridge too far?
And now a swift reminder of the management services
“A Checkpoint Group of external stakeholders specifically tasked with advising the
Council on the development of the service model”

6. The highest of standards are clearly set down – this is
what you are entitled to for 15% of the project cost
--------- 1. Foreword

7. The highest of standards are clearly set down – this is what
you are entitled to for 15% of the project cost
“MANAGEMENT AND PROCEDURES”

8. The highest of standards are clearly set down – this is what
you are entitled to for 15% of the project cost
“MANAGEMENT AND PROCEDURES”

9. The highest of standards are clearly set down – this is what
you are entitled to for 15% of the project cost
“MANAGEMENT AND PROCEDURES”
Fundamental services include

10. The highest of standards are clearly set down – this is what
you are entitled to for 15% of the project cost
“MANAGEMENT AND PROCEDURES”
Also
The initial site survey
should therefore define
the extent of the work
Of course undermeasurement
of required works is
“problematic” – it is also
wrong
Another spelling error apart,
of course this is a requirement

11. The highest of standards are clearly set down – this is what
you are entitled to for 15% of the project cost
“MANAGEMENT AND PROCEDURES”
And there’s more .....
“The only works legally allowed to be carried out are those noted on the statutory notice”
If more work is “necessary” then it is to be included in the TENDER –
not months or years later

12. The highest of standards are clearly set down – this is what
you are entitled to for 15% of the project cost
“MANAGEMENT AND PROCEDURES”
And then there is the all important issue of costs.
Is it that owners are to be
NOTIFIED AND INFORMED
ABOUT COST INCREASES?
Or kept in the dark until it is
too late?
What happened to proper
professional cost control and
cost reporting –
homeowners are paying a
15% fee for this service.

13. Case Study
MAY 2008
AUGUST 2008
OCTOBER 2008
Contractor appointed
Project Cost In process of confirming a
likely cost for the completed Cost projection of final cost is
£59,077.37 completed. Now “In the
works
region of £60,000”
NOVEMBER 2008
DECEMBER 2008 MAY 2009
Oh dear – Seems the plan is
“ No further cost updates The works are completed. to put a scaffold up after the
since our October 2008 works are completed to
newsletter” render a chimney???. This is
to cost (including more
scaffolding) £6,000
NOVEMBER 2011 NOVEMBER 2011
Final Invoice – at worst The total bill hits
£66,000 £107,000

14. This case study is the subject of a
formal complaint
CEC get back from
the shop and they
have spent £350 of
my money. They
want paid but won’t
let me see the till
receipt
120000
100000
80000
CEC phone from the
shops and reassure 60000
me that the grocery
bill is indeed as close 40000
to £200 as doesn’t
20000
matter. All is well.
0
Quotation Projected FINAL
Final Cost ACCOUNT
CEC have inspected
the fridge and larder.
Apparently I need
£200 worth of
groceries and they’ll
get them for me.

15. Case Study
My Clients have good reason to query why their
bill escalated . Obviously the construction
industry is a bit more complex than a
supermarket but simple sums apply to both. How easy is it to produce a till receipt for the
project (or Final Account as we call it) for
comparison with the original costed shopping
list (or accepted tender) as we call it.
CEC have invoiced my clients. They believe their
invoice to be correct. CEC, send to me or let me
see your substantiation & soon. My clients are
rightly concerned about the escalated bill so let’s
see how much they are being charged for a
quoin, rybat, bit of lead or tin of beans.
And that’s not all. Whilst CEC are digging out their copies of the tender and Final Account, they should also think about:-
And, how appalling is this? ..............

16. Why have the owners suffered consequential damage due to builders rubble blocking
downpipes with subsequent freezing, cracking and (long reported) water ingress to two
properties with resultant timber damage and ceilings coming down