Scenario: When Barry saw the bid from the mason, he should have been suspicious. Why was his best mason’s bid so much lower than the other bids? The architect’s specifications for the fireplace called for a “split Roman brick” firebox, with a herringbone pattern in the rear face. Master Mason was clearly the low bidder, but Master Mason had always done good work for Barry. So he awarded it the contract and went about his business. The mason got the brick approved and placed the order.
The first indication of trouble was when the architect called. “What’s up with the fireplace?” he asked. “I just saw pictures of the installation, and it’s all wrong. They laid the herringbone pattern with the flat 4-inch side showing. It looks terrible.”
“I saw it myself,” Barry said. “I thought he did a good job.”
“The workmanship is good,” the architect admitted. “But they did it all wrong. It wasn’t supposed to look like that at all.” “Well, there weren’t any detail drawings,” Barry said. “How were we supposed to know how it was supposed to look?”
“Because I specified “split Roman brick,” the architect answered. “Each of the bricks in the face was supposed to be split down the middle … the smaller pieces would have given the detail we were looking for. This is just totally unacceptable. I want you to rip it out and do it over again.”
This put Barry in a quandary. First, he obviously hadn’t budgeted for this event. Second, redoing the fireplace would delay the project. And while he felt that the mason bore the primary responsibility, he didn’t want to jeopardize the relationship he had spent years building.
What should Barry do?
Solution: This is never an easy situation, and there’s plenty of blame to spread around. The use of split Roman brick is an unusual specification and should have been investigated more thoroughly by Barry and the mason. Since the architect was so specific and particular, he should have provided a detail drawing so the mason had a clearer understanding of what was wanted. Barry’s radar should have gone off as soon as he saw that his best mason had provided the lowest bid. The old saying, “Never look a gift horse in the mouth,” is a recipe for disaster where bids from reliable contractors are concerned. If the price seems low, it probably is because the contractor didn’t understand either the scope of the work or the quality of workmanship required, or he left something out. In any case, if subcontractors discover that they’re going to lose money on a contract, they will often start looking for ways to cut corners, and that can ultimately lead to more expensive mistakes and remedial work.
Whenever a builder receives a questionable bid, he should contact the subcontractor and discuss the work with him. Sometimes there’s a good reason for the low bid: The subcontractor can obtain the materials at a discount, or he has an otherwise idle crew that he needs to keep busy. But if there is a genuine mistake on the part of the bidder, give him a chance to rectify his mistake at this point, not later when he’s put in untold hours and materials in doing the job wrong.
Since Barry didn’t do any of these things, what can he do to rectify the situation? He may have no choice but to rip out the face brick in the fireplace and replace it with split Roman brick as specified. Depending on his relationship with the subcontractor, Barry may offer to pay part of the cost of redoing the fireplace, although the primary responsibility should fall on the mason for not following specifications.
In any event, despite the cost and the delay, Barry should not view this occurrence as an unmitigated disaster. If Barry can keep this problem from escalating into a full-blown clash of wills, it can set the stage for future fruitful working relationships.
Al Trellis, a co-founder of Home Builders Network, has more than 25 years of experience as a custom builder, speaker, and consultant.
