Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Cash row puts tram contract at risk

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 22 February 2009
A MULTI-million-pound contract for Edinburgh's tram works could be torn up if the company in charge of it refuses to drop demands for an extra £80m.
As parts of Edinburgh continue to suffer gridlock because of road closures, council sources suggested they were ready to bring in a new company to finish the work if the current contractors – German construction company Bilfinger Berger – refuses to
do so within the agreed budget of £512m.

But with negotiations between the parties remaining deadlocked, fears were raised that the whole project was now facing delays of a year or longer, to the anger of Edinburgh traders and residents.

Politicians and retailers accused the company of "holding the city to ransom", and urged the council to stick to the original cost and timetable of the four-year-long works.

Bilfinger Berger agreed to the £512m contract in May last year, but last week said it needed an extra £40m to £80m to complete the works.

The demand came on Thursday, 48 hours before Edinburgh's Princes Street was closed for a scheduled nine months for the tram rails to be laid.

The company claimed it needed the extra money because of expensive delays to tram works at Leith Walk and Gogarburn, caused by utilities companies failing to lay cables and pipes on time.

The closure of Princes Street went ahead as planned on Friday, but without any construction workers, as the two sides failed to reach agreement during talks.

From Waverley Bridge to Lothian Road, the street was barricaded by traffic cones, forcing buses and taxis along George Street.

A source close to the council said Transport Initiatives Edinburgh (TIE), the branch of the council in charge of the tram works, would not bow to the contractors' demands.

He said: "What is the point of having a signed contract and an agreed budget and then paying more? Does that mean if there is a new contract, in six months they will want more money?"

He insisted that other companies could finish the tram work project.

He said: "We are aware that there are other contractors in the UK who would be available to continue the work. It's not something that's going to happen this month or next month, but clearly if you continue not to reach any resolution it's something that has to be looked at."

Scottish Tory chief whip David McLetchie yesterday handed out 2,000 leaflets on Princes Street urging the council not to be "held for ransom" by Bilfinger Berger. He said:

"It's going to be a significant delay. We have got to pull out all the legal stops to make sure that the contract we have is honoured."

A spokesman for Bilfinger Berger said: "As the client failed to meet contractually agreed conditions, and as no agreement has been reached, construction work in Princes Street cannot yet commence.

"Contrary to reports, additional costs of £80m have never been requested as a pre-condition for the start of works in Princes Street."





Page 1 of 1

 
1

Son of Gramsci,

Edinburgh 22/02/2009 00:15:58
McLetchie is being a fool. There will be a huge contract specifying conditions on both parties. If the contractor did not think they had a case to fight in arbitration or court, they would not be taking this action.
2

Charles MN,

22/02/2009 01:43:12
#1
If the contractor had a good case they would have continued with the work knowing that they could claim any excess at the end of the contract. That's how it normally works. What the contractor is wanting is the contract changed before they do any work.
3

gggrumpy,

22/02/2009 01:43:30
Trams are for bams.






If they live long enough to see them.
4

Thomas the Tank,

Edinburgh 22/02/2009 08:10:29
#1, Whatever else McLetchie might be he's not a fool - he's an experienced Civil Lawyer, and he's also one of the movers of the 'Not a penny more' motion, endorsed by the Scottish Parluament. Despite the blustering of Auld Davy Mackay, sacked Ch.Exec. of the SRU and now 'In Charge' of the TramCar Fiasco, Edinburgh knew EXACTLY what the budget was. Edinburgh Council and TIE - in reality, one and the same - have made a catastrophic (and entirely forseeable) shambles out of managing what was never more than a political vanity project by the previous Labour administration.
5

Mr. Lachie Todd,

Edinburgh 22/02/2009 09:18:58
This is a fixed price contract.

The consortium of Bilfinger Berger has also had its fingers burned in Norway where it has made massive losses on a large road contract there.

Strangely the loss is believed to be in the order of £80 million?

You can read all about it in one of Scotland's other Sundays, or log on to the English language version of the Norwegian newspaper Aftenposten.
6

Son of Gramsci,

Edinburgh 22/02/2009 09:28:28
#4 - I only said he was being a fool on this issue - as with many others trams have gone to his head. The whole of public procurement and major infrastructure history tells us that if you launch on a project of this nature, you end up paying more than you can possible imagine. He was a fool to imagine that a motion in Parliament was going to change this.

#2, #5 - Oh yes, this was a fixed price contract, but within a set of constraints. The contractor clearly believes that the circumstances under the control of the council have changed. Hard to refute, looking at the pace of progress and chopping and changing. I think that their cash shortage has led them to negotiate first and build second.
7

Mr. Lachie Todd,

Edinburgh 22/02/2009 09:48:23
According to the Norwegian media, their Government wasn't bullied by the tram contractors and held them to every last krone of the contract.
8

Tiso1000,

22/02/2009 10:40:02
TIE need to start telling the truth
Belfinger under the contract will claiming an extension of time to the contract period due to delays such the failure of the service diversion works finishing on time and addtional works not shown in the design which will take longer to complete. Under the form of construction contract they are obliged within a set time period to state what there additional costs are which they did on Friday. Someone in TIE may have even asked for them to give a final figure that transfers all the risk to the contractor thus producing a real fixed price contract. Although £80m seems high the staff costs for this project for the contractor will run between £45-50m

As for Mcletchie he should get the whole story first or stick to taxis

Another fact is that not one tram project in the UK has every come in on budget. The person who takes the risk gets the loss just ask carrilion about Nottingham
9

JimboJimbo,

22/02/2009 10:54:49
Hang on a minute! The utility companies failed to do their bit prior to the start of Bilfinger Berger's work. Who contracted the Utility companies? If it was done directly by TIE then they are at fault and not Bilfinger Berger.
10

Euan,

Edinburgh 22/02/2009 10:55:13
#5

The article in The Sunday Herald does state that Bilfinger Berger has made a substantial loss on it's project in Norway and it's overall profits are down.

http://www.sundayherald.com/news/heraldnews/display.var.2490915.0.revealed_edinburgh_tram_firm_lost_80m_in_norwegian_road_project.php

But what has not been talked about is why Bilfinger Berger has brought this situation to the fore. It's easy to assume that they are simply asking for more money to shore-up their accounts, but let's look at the so far non-reported facts.

TIE have failed to complete many of the works on the tram route in time. The utility works at Haymarket, for example, were supposed to be finished in November 2008. Currently this part of town looks like a London street during the Blitz.

Leith Walk - yet MORE unfinished and badly-planned works are still on the go, MONTHS behind schedule. This, after all, was the street where the first 'milestone' tracks were to be laid LAST YEAR, and then put back to January '09. We're nearing March now and still no sign of ANY tracks going down.

And now Princes Street. There have been huge holes here for weeks now, with the many typical workmen standing around seemingly doing nothing.

All we have heard is that TIE have done nothing wrong and all the flack is being directed against Bilfinger Berger for supposedly asking for more money.

I would like to hear some proper statements from TIE just admitting that through their own sheer incompetence, they themselves have contributed considerably to the situation Edinburgh currently finds itself in.


11

Americanbob,

22/02/2009 11:07:26
#8 Tiso, "TIE need to start telling the truth."
Why change the habit of their lifetime? TIE has never given the truth the whole truth and nothing like the truth, about this project. It has been clear from it's conception that this tramway could never be built in this day and age within the quoted figures, especially when so much of the money has been spent on traffic detours and superfluous advertising such as the boards erected all along the planned trackway carrying phrases such as "Taking you to the shops in 20??". If TIE wanted to tell the truth these signs should read "Taking you for a ride now!"
12

Son of Gramsci,

Embra 22/02/2009 12:13:13
#11 Yes - I can't believe that they are still digging up and filling in Leith Walk. What can there still be to find? Since that is pretty much the first place they started digging, things must be more complex down there than anyone thought at the start.

Another piece of madness, North St Andrew Street was filled in for Hogmanay, and then dug up again, despite being nowhere near the street party.

Same old, same old, public sector contract mananagement is always a problem, as public sector bodies can never be consistent about what they want.
13

Happy Hibee,

22/02/2009 12:38:46
#8 & #10

Not far away with your comments.
14

Gordon Clifford,

Denai Spain 22/02/2009 12:53:02
My experience with high value fixed price contracts is that they are extremely difficult to prepare and manage, the low bidder is more often than not the cheapest in the long run. Many companies will buy the job by submitting a low bid and then recover the shortfall by attempting to re-negotiate after contract award. I believe that the contingency for this contract was £30 million, not nearly sufficient for a project of this size and complexity 20 to 30% would have been a more accurate number. Whoever prepared the bid documents and negotiated the contract on behalf of The Scottish Government would appear to have had very limited experience of dealing with major contracts.
15

Mr. Lachie Todd,

Edinburgh 22/02/2009 12:57:07
According to the Civil Engineering News, the contract time in Edinburgh compares favourably with other tram projects both here in the UK, and in Europe, and contrary to mythical opinions, the work was on time.

Instead of berating TIE, commentators should be asking the German Consortium why it has suddenly sprung this on Edinburgh?

It is glaringly obvious?

The consortium tendered at a fixed rate during the good times, exactly as it did in Norway with the E18 road project, where it eventually made a loss of £80 million, the sum it hopes to recoup in Edinburgh!

However, overall the banking crises has been disastrous for construction companies throughout Europe because of a lack of credit.


16

Euan,

Edinburgh 22/02/2009 13:02:50
#15

I accept what you're saying, and there is indeed a question mark over the German company's actions.

But we have STILL not heard in a statement from TIE, that they themselves have reneged on their part of the contract.

I'd be willing to place a bet that they have...
17

calum,

22/02/2009 13:29:43
To all the politicians who supported this farce and who are now in hiding lest anyone asks them to justify their support, just take a walk ........to your local hospital who are struggling to staff wards ........to your local police station who haven't enough police officers to eradicate the fear of crime .......to your local fire station which is under threat of closure with the nearest emergency cover miles away ........and to your local school with its leaky roofs, its broken toilets, its empty bookshelves and its threadbare fabric.
Then come back and tell the country why this Tram Project In Edinburgh is better for Scotland. And if you can't do that, Quit!
18

Charles MN,

22/02/2009 14:04:34
#15
What plan are you talking about? This presentation by Alasdair Sim from TIE in April 2008 gave a completion date for the MUDFA works of Dec 2008, that clearly hasn't happened with work months away from completion on Leith Walk and barely started on Princes St.

http://scots.sharepoint.apptix.net/SCOTS%20Seminar%202008/Alasdair%20Sim%20-%20Edinburgh%20Tram%20Project.pdf

19

Andrew,

22/02/2009 15:04:26
Hocus pocus, jiggery-pokery and a cooking of the books!
BUT THIS IS NO PANTOMINE!!!!
20

Zemi,

22/02/2009 15:38:08
You Know what this town REALLY needs, don't you?

http://tinyurl.com/2wwhrh
21

Goat Boy,

22/02/2009 17:47:32
Has anyone seen the lovely new leaflet that has been produced by TIE? Looks like all the buses are being forced along George Street.

Now that's NOT a good idea!

George Street is about to become one of THE most polluted streets in Scotland. But they didn't mention this in the leaflet; I wonder why?


22

GraemeH,

Edinburgh 22/02/2009 18:35:29
#15 - Please read the business plan before making these statements. It has a project milestone schedule which allows you to work out just how late it is.

As #18 says, the utility diversions were to be complete by November actually (not Dec) whilst it also says that construction of the depot was to commence in July 2008. As yet, they are still doing the gorund works.

It is at least six months late and God only knows how much over budget.
23

Yonthing!,

23/02/2009 11:54:45
Why aren't the "Utility" companies under a penalty clause for failure to deliver their part on time? If they have delayed the progress, then they should be responsible for any additional costs incurred to subsequent phases.

Surely that would be written into the contract?

Hmm, which councilor has shares in McAlpines?


 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.