Another way to view this is that words should not be interpreted to have a ridiculous meaning. That "excessive" assistance will be back charged makes clear that normal amount of assistance will not be back charged.
Bv Sent from my Motorola ATRIX™ 4G on AT&T -----Original message----- From: "Failla, Daniel" <[email protected]> To: "'[email protected]'" <[email protected]> Sent: Tue, Nov 6, 2012 14:36:58 GMT+00:00 Subject: RE: Project Specifications So are Architects/General Contractor going to start back charging for RFI's? I have had projects with 8 RFI's because of issues with the bid documents and the classic statement on the drawing, "Contractor shall not deviate without written approval." Dan Failla Our Town Fire Sprinkler Designs Charleston, SC FMO -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2012 9:16 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Project Specifications Found something new in a FP spec that I think is worth sharing. Spec's are copyrighted by a nationally known FP consultant. "Excessive assistance provided by the Architect/General Contractor to the Contractor, at the Contractor's request, shall be at cost to the Contractor, via back charge, ..." And it goes on to say that just because they charged for the assistance it doesn't "imply direction or approval". It's odd that there is no "Excessive Interference" clause. Ron Fletcher Aero - Phoenix _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/private/sprinklerforum/attachments/20121106/0ba4ae81/attachment.html> _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://fireball.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum
