Contractor Not Entitled to Recover for Extra Work in Absence of Written Authorization
Publication: Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice
Volume 131, Issue 2
Abstract
Virtually every construction contract contains a changes clause that permits an owner to make changes to the work or accommodate unanticipated changes and provides a mechanism for the contractor to be paid for such changes. Usually, the changes provision requires the contractor to receive a written change order, or at least written authorization, prior to proceeding with the work or risk not being paid for that extra work. Likewise, bid documents usually require any interpretations be in writing in order for them to be binding. Unfortunately, far too often contractors bid on a job or perform extra work without first obtaining the written clarification or authorization. While some owners may pay for the work anyway, they are usually not required to do so in the absence of a waiver of the contract requirement. In Seneca Valley, Inc. v. Village of Caldwell, a contractor who did not receive the appropriate written authorization prior to performing extra work was denied recovery for that work.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Endnotes
1.
156 Ohio App. 3d 628, 808 N.E.2d 422 (2004).
2.
This was apparently because a property owner did not want the pipeline on his property, but insisted it be in the road right-of-way.
3.
The decision does not explain the discrepancy between this figure (1,351 cubic yards) and the amount Seneca Valley testified it placed (1,380 cubic yards).
4.
According to Seneca Valley’s representative, a residential driveway requires approximately 8 square yards.
5.
In reaching this conclusion, the court relied heavily on Foster Wheeler Enviresponse, Inc. v. Franklin County Convention Facilities Authority, 78 Ohio St. 3d 353, 678 N.E.2d 519 (1997), which set forth the “universally recognized” legal tenet that a contract requirement calling for written change orders is valid and enforceable unless waived by the owner.
6.
Contractors are often deprived of compensation because of failure to comply with terms of the contract as it relates to additional compensation. For instance, the Washington State Supreme Court takes a similarly tough position regarding the requirement for complying with contractual notice provisions in order to assert a claim on a project. See Mike M. Johnson, Inc. v. County of Spokane, 150 Wn.2d 375, 78 P.3d 161 (2003).
7.
“Unjust enrichment” arises where one confers a benefit on another without receiving the reasonable value of the services rendered.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Copyright
© 2005 ASCE.
History
Published online: Apr 1, 2005
Published in print: Apr 2005
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.