Dishonest Contractor?

[LWyatt]

The short version: Contractor claims they didn't cut reinforcing bars, but I have before-and-after photos proving that they did. Regardless, the cut bars will be repaired as part of ongoing repair works. Do I need to make an issue out of this? Or is it a moot point since it will all be repaired?

The long version: A GC is carrying out repairs on some old (and badly damaged) concrete as part of a larger retrofit project. This necessitated breaking out some of the concrete to expose the reinforcing bars. While on site today, I (design engineer working for the EOR) observed that two longitudinal bars in a column were cut in a very odd manner. The GC told me they "found it like this" and they claimed that "vandalism in the 80's" is to blame. My concerns: 1) the bars in question are plain (ie, not deformed bars) and the wall in question is part of the 1920's original build, so it makes no sense that to blame 1980's. 2) More importantly, I found a photo from a past site visit (~1 month ago) showing that the bars were not cut at that time. So it's pretty clear to me that the contractor has cut these bars, and then lied to me when stating that they didn't. Now this work is all being done in the course of a concrete repair, so the bars will be re-joined and the concrete made good. So it's a moot point and this is a non-issue, right? Or does it speak to a larger issue that needs to be escalated? I know of some other issues on site (not related to concrete repair) where work was done either poorly, wrongly, or both. I've documented all of these issues via site reports, and the contractor has made good on all of them (sometimes after a lot of arguing and pressure) but the fact that a) there are so many issues, and b) I was lied to) aren't sitting well with me. Any thoughts / advice? Thanks!

 

[geotechguy1]

I don't have an answer to your question but 'dishonest contractor' is almost a tautology IMO.

 

[phamENG]

Another day on the job, unfortunately. Document it and keep track. As long as they fix everything, all is well. Watch them like a hawk, though. Because it'll be the things you don't catch that will cause problems. If you feel you need to be on site more, your boss may choose to use this to get more fee for observations.

Only escalation should be to the EOR (your boss). Learn from how they handle it. Approaches may differ based on progress in construction, client temperament, etc.

 

[WinelandV]

The only other thing to look out for is if they submit a bill to the owner trying to re-coup their cost for splicing these cut bars.

Please note that is a "v" (as in Violin) not a "y".

 

[Enable]

I have a fair amount of experience in concrete restoration as both a contractor and as an engineer. My protocol has always been that a contractor receives professional courtesy (meaning a light form of trust that they did their jobish) until they lose it. But the first instance they do, they get the book. Hit them over the head with absolutely everything. If you don't they just keep doing it and it gets tiring, quickly.

On restoration, since the projects tend to be smaller these things can be quite onerous and are usually skipped. So make an issue of them, and trust me, next time they'll think twice about lying (or...at the very least get better at covering it up. Which, meh, what you gonna do).

Where are the mill certs for the rebar you're installing?

Where are your stamped weld procedures by a certified welding engineer?

Where is the shoring inspection letter prior to demo every time you move a post shore?

Where is your formwork / demolition / erection plan for each unique condition?

Where are the training records indicating the workers on my site have 5 years of relevant experience?

Where is your geotech report confirming bearing capacity at all locations? You did 2 locations? Nope, try again. Want some statistics if you're going to do random sampling thanks.

Oh and some of my favourites are dealing with site safety issues. These aren't usually your business but as an engineer you can make an absolute fuss about them due to our obligation to protect public safety (includes the workers). So things like signage, air quality check protocols, temp traffic lights, temp barriers, dust control, etc can all be pointed out if they are either not up to spec or below industry standard (likely will be).

Also, pull the PM for the contractor aside on-site with the foreman and tell them flat out what you're doing. How you go about that is for you to feel out but in general I like to be very calm and tell them that they've screwed themselves. It's their option to make better decisions going forward.

Note: You cannot be unreasonable in the sense that you request things that really were not part of their scope / project / tender. But there's so much shit we usually let slide that IS in there, you will wont have to make anything up to make their life a difficult one.

Note2: This advice gets tempered a bit if you have a project where timelines are actually critical, and not just critical because someone says so. For example, a school or something where the opening date is absolutely fixed. In that case, it's a document and move on plus beefing up your frequency of inspections. Don't go too often though as you want to be able to say you still only performed periodic inspections and wern't providing full-time supervision.

 

[MotorCity]

In fairness to the GC, they may not have cut it. It could have been one of their subs and the GC was unaware of it until you brought it to their attention. If it was really vandalism in the 80's, the exposed cut section should be weathered, tarnished, rusted, etc. Is that the case or is it bright shiny metal?

Is it a moot point? Absolutely not. In fact, I would say its quite the opposite. Repairing and welding rebar deserves much closer observation and scrutiny. It takes a skilled welder to do it right. Definitely have the repairs inspected.

 

[LWyatt]

Thanks Everyone, these replies are super helpful!

@Enable I agree, and have a similar philosophy of "professional courtesy". However, I have been "throwing the book" at this contractor for several months now. Each specific instance gets addressed, but the pattern continues.....

@MotorCity - Always a possibility that a subcontract has meddled in this. However, the GC is self-performing most of this work so I'm not feeling like giving them any leeway. The cut ends are smooth and shiny. There is very little doubt in my mind that the cut is NOT ~40 years old.

For those following along at home, I had a discussion about this with my boss (the EOR). He ended up on the phone with the owner of the GC company. The next time I went to site, I was met by one of the GC's senior partners who has suddenly taking a keen interest in this job. Which is a good sign, at least for now!