> It's not uncommon, in contracts that I have had knowledge of
> (including government contracts), for the Owner to have the option
> of accepting work that did not meet specification in consideration
> for a reduction in contract price. But never at the expense of
> safety! Never!!!
That occurred to me because I've spent a lot of time buying stuff
off. But it's only when money moves into the picture that I get
suspicious. I don't do buildings, so I don't deal with architectural/
cosmetic issues much, although I'll buy off the odd scratch or dent
from time to time, but almost never in trade for cash. In fact, I
couldn't tell what kinds of non-conformities were at issue either,
but the trade-off really raised a flag with me.
Christopher Wright P.E. |"They couldn't hit an elephant at
chrisw@skypoint.com | this distance" (last words of Gen.
.......................................| John Sedgwick, Spotsylvania
1864)
http://www.skypoint.com/~chrisw/
******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
* Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
*
* This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
* Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
* subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*
http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
* Questions to seaint-ad@seaint.org. Remember, any email you
* send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
* without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
* site at: http://www.seaint.org
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********