My architect advised against appointing a Quantity Surveyor. He also advised that the Clerk-of-Works be included in the Main Contractor's Contract.

Are these common practices? What are the advantages and disadvantages of the suggested approach?

Does anybody know the answer to my question please?

clerk of works, i would say is very impt cos he will serve as the pair of eyes on site as the Architect cannot be on the job everyday; you certainly cannot trust contractors fully.

as for QS, it depends. do you know the function of QS? if Architect can provide QS services in terms of contractural advice and costing/estimate advice, then you need not engage QS. the advantage of getting QS is that most architect are concern on design matters; most wanted award-winning design hence if you have an independent QS, he/she can provide an impartial advice on cost matters. after the project had ended, the architect can concentrate on defects rectification process, leaving the QS to close the final accounts.

also depends on how big is your project and procurement method. if you using traditional BQ projects, QS is highly recommended. if you doing design and build or Lump sum contracts, you can do away with QS services if your project is small, but you must be on-the-ball on keeping an eye on your budget.

what is your architect's concern? additional fee incurred?

jmho.

(fyi, i'm not a house owner, but was from the construction industry, so my views are as such. )

Edited June 11, 201016 yr by jeda

Jeda, thanks for sharing!

I don't know what my architect's concern is... I rather think the Clerk-of-Works should be employed by me, and not be part of the main contractor's contract... Mine is a small project as construction goes... less than a million. I will also be doing lump sum. So I guess I don't need a QS.

I will remember to keep an eagle's eye on the costs.

Building contracts in S'pore follows the standards laid out by Singapore Institute of Architects Conditions of Contract (insider's call them the 'SIA Conditions of Contracts). For example, how your contract will be properly written out (conditions & scope of work), how payment will be assessed and made, how addition/omission work will be assessed and made. You may want to google and read them up first before commiting to your Architect.

Adding on to what Jedas had already written, the Quantity Surveyor also represents an independant party when it comes to assessing and making of payment to your contractors; as well as taking an impartial stand in the event of contractual disputes.

Let's say, if the Architect, Quantity Surveyor and Contractor, are all the same 'person', where's the transparency ?

And I have a copy of the SIA Conditions of contracts for Lumpsum contracts. You can loan it if it interest you.

My architect advised against appointing a Quantity Surveyor. He also advised that the Clerk-of-Works be included in the Main Contractor's Contract.

Are these common practices? What are the advantages and disadvantages of the suggested approach?

Since its a small project which is less then a million, and also a lump sum contract, what the archi advise you is correct, if you are going through all the proper steps which include QS,COW and tendering, then your cost will sure rise to over a million for a semi-d or even corner terrace.

A part time COW is need for your project thus just include in the main contractor contract will do cause this will expedite all your building works eventually and also less complication and V.O involved.

Just for your reference:)

Cheers!

Rummi and Philzero... many thanks!