18-month delay for cash from Bovis

A small subcontractor has vowed never to work for Bovis again after allegedly waiting more than 18 months for payment. He is also urging fellow subcontractors to make a stand if they think that they have received late payments from other main contractors.

Pat Clasby, co-owner of £750,000 turnover groundworks specialist PMJ Clasby, claims that he is owed in the region of £55,000 for work carried out at three Bovis Lelliott contracts in London.

The amounts date back to contracts completed in March 1997, June 1997 and September 1997 for a care home in Kingsbury, the Centre for Magic Arts in Euston, and groundworks at the St George's Hospital site in Tooting.

Clasby said the money owed had created financial difficulties for his 11-year-old firm and that he had to double the Staines-based company's overdraft facility at the bank in order to meet wage bills and those from suppliers.

Clasby claimed that the scope of works undertaken by his firm was increased on both the care home and the Centre for Magic Arts projects, and that the value of the original tenders of £220,000 and £100,000 respectively had risen to final account figures of £255,000 and £114,000.

He added that the additional work was covered by variation orders and that "quite a lot [of variations] were priced, and the prices accepted [by Bovis], before work was started."

Clasby said his firm's financial problems were exacerbated by taking on the projects one after another. "All the while the Fairfields [care home] job was going on, I was getting pats on the back and on the strength of that I was asked to negotiate [a price] for the Euston contract." He said that he experienced no real problems over payment while Clasby's workforce was actually on site at the three jobs. "I received regular payments and a reasonable proportion of the amount that I had submitted. Everything seemed to be hunky-dory and I was happy about their attitude towards me and thought they must be pleased with the way we did things, otherwise they would not have asked us to bid for the next job."

Clasby said the attitude seemed to change once the third job at Tooting was finished. "Once I was down the road, it seemed my account was on hold." Clasby avoided making an issue of why he was not receiving his full entitlement at the end of the first contract. "I avoided the issue because it was Bovis Lelliott and because the job had gone well. With hindsight, I was wrong and should have brought it to a head earlier but I did not want to get contractual or confrontational."

A Bovis spokesman commented: "Our view is that, in each instance, the final accounts were submitted some time after the works in question were carried-out making it all the harder for us to verify the full extent of the work and therefore the amount being charged [by Clasby]."

Clasby refuted Bovis's claim and said that he submitted evaluations every month for payment.