CO129-509-15 Water supply- development scheme 30-1-1928 - 17-1-1929 — Page 170

-3-

168

General Conditions, and which they state they are not prepared

to accept as presently set out. Such matters, however, would be

more for discussion and arrangement between your Solicitors and

the selected firm. Further, both firms have made large additions

to the sums necessary to construct the work to cover contingencies

that might arise, and which, although matters over which they

have no control, they consider the General Conditions would

make they liable for without redress. In both cases they

have accordingly added to their tenders a sum which they

consider sufficient to protect them should such contingencies

arise.

In the case of Messrs. Armstrong's Tender No.1.

Taking their own figures, it would appear that at least a sum

of about £62,000 is allowed for contingencies that might arise

and profit. The risk allowance, according to their letter,

amounts to 25% of their tender, In the case of Messrs.

Muirhead, the sum allowed for such is considerably more and

accounts largely for the difference in the two tenders.

Taking Messrs. Armstrong's tender No.1 and

Messrs. Muirhead's tender, the difference is very considerable,

and if a tender is to be accepted which shall release the

Government of all risks connected with the work, then the tender

of Messrs. Armstrong is the more acceptable tender. The items

in their Schedule appear to be priced with care. It should be

remmebered that in both tenders, as required by the specification,

provisional amounts are allowed for material and special work,

which would, if not required, be deducted from the contræt,

comprise a sum of approximately £10,000. These items were

included as usual on work of this description, so that the

Engineer in charge would have latitude to deal with unforeseen

events without seriously affecting the contract amount. One item

on Messrs. Armstrong's No.1 Tender would require some

and

Page 170Page 171