-
Best Practice: Differing Site Conditions Are an Owner Risk Before They Become a Contractor Claim
I was recently contacted about a site in Philadelphia. The owner had purchased a corner lot at a prominent intersection. The site had clearly been developed before. In its current condition, it had a large concrete pad and two dilapidated buildings connected to each other. The owner’s plan was simple. Demolish what is there and…
-
Commentary: Proactive Contract Writing Prevents Construction Problems Before They Become Claims
Over coffee the other morning, I was reading this Lexology article on data centre disputes: “Dispute resolution in data centre projects: Proactive strategies for a high-stakes environment”. It is written from a legal perspective. But the owner-side lesson is broader. Disputes do not usually begin when lawyers get involved. They begin much earlier, when project…
-
Commentary – Owner Financing Clauses in Construction Contracts Are Not Boilerplate
Most owners overlook this construction contract risk In a recent contract review, I found a redline that should concern every owner, project manager, and procurement professional. The contractor had taken the owner’s obligation to provide evidence of financial arrangements and turned any breach of that clause into a material breach. That is not a small…
-
Commentary: Why “Go Slow to Go Fast in Construction” Is Procurement’s Job Now
Over coffee the other morning, I was reading a Lexology article on construction disputes. It echoed something I wrote on my own blog almost two years ago. We keep learning the same lesson: every time we skip a step, we buy trouble later. You hear the phrase “go slow to go fast in construction” more…
-
Industry Watch: How This Commonly Accepted Clause Can Legally Shut Down Your Job
Most owners sign the AIA A201 General Conditions without ever discussing Section 2.2. Until it becomes a problem. A recent court decision analyzed in Lexology highlights what happens when an owner fails to provide “evidence of financial arrangements” as required under AIA A201 §2.2. In that case, the court sided with the developer after financial…
-
Best Practice: Why Reusing Old Liquidated Damages Clauses Puts Owners at Risk
For private owners, liquidated damages clauses are meant to manage schedule risk. But when those clauses are recycled from old contracts (written for different projects, markets, and risk profiles) they can become unenforceable. Worse, they can backfire at the exact moment you need them most. The Problem: Familiar Language, New Risk Liquidated damages clauses appear…
-
Industry Watch: New York’s Retainage Law Exposes a Bigger Owner-Side Blind Spot
Prompt payment laws rarely come up, until they’re violated. That was my first reaction reading New York’s latest retainage amendment. I’m not surprised by the law itself. I’ve been writing about prompt payment acts around the world for years. What struck me was how many standard construction contracts are likely out of compliance under this…
-
Industry Watch: Documentation Before Rework Is a Discipline, Not a Legal Tactic
I’ve lost count of how many times I’ve walked a site, seen a condition that clearly needed corrective work, and heard a project leader say, “Let’s just fix it and be done.” There’s a natural urge to get a bad condition behind you. I get it — you’re protecting budget, schedule, and reputation. But the…
-
Industry Watch: Why Owners Must Treat Prompt Payment and Holdback Reforms as Strategic Risks — Not Just Legal Mandates
On a recent capital program call, an owner asked — “Are prompt payment laws really going to affect us?”The short answer: not just if you’re in Canada — but soon enough if you manage cross-border capital projects. Recent Canadian reforms aren’t isolated legal quirks. They reflect a global shift toward shorter payment timelines, stricter holdback…
-
Industry Watch: Prompt Payment Laws in Construction — Recent Cases Owners Can’t Ignore
On a Massachusetts project, an owner thought it was “just” behind on paperwork. Instead, a court found it had breached the Prompt Payment Act, deemed seven applications approved, and ordered payment of more than $4.6 million — before the owner’s own claims were even heard. That’s exactly what happened in the Tocci Building Corp. v.…