Thread Content
Party A’s Guide to Project Settlement Auditing: Among the various stages of construction, the final settlement is the most time-consuming and complex phase. The main reason for this is that in today’s market, projects are usually awarded to bidders who offer the lowest prices. To win bids, contractors adopt a strategy of competing on low prices to gain a foothold in the market, and then seeking profits through project claims. This makes the settlement process more complicated and increases the difficulty of the task, as it also puts a heavy strain on the professional skills of those responsible for settlement. As representatives of the client, how can we conduct proper audits of project costs to ensure that they are more in line with reality and more reasonable? This needs to be addressed at the source; if the source is taken care of properly, there will be much less trouble later on. Therefore, the material variation, change, and settlement terms should be clearly specified in the contract. For example, in the case of a fixed total price with no adjustments allowed within a certain percentage range, it’s likely that the two parties will have different interpretations of what that percentage refers to. The client may think that adjustments are only permissible if the increase exceeds a certain percentage of the total price, while the contractor, seeking to protect its own interests, will interpret it as meaning that adjustments can be made if the workload for the same project increases by more than that percentage. Another example is “price difference adjustment”; the base price for such adjustments is usually specified in the tender documents or contract, with the key aspect being the determination of market prices. Conventionally, it is sufficient to have the purchase invoice from Party B, but given the varying prices of identical materials in the market, Party A cannot always rely solely on the invoices provided by Party B. Party A generally requires that the price be based on the market price at the time of material procurement. However, in actual construction, costs such as transportation must be taken into account; the actual price of the materials upon arrival is higher than the prices listed in available information for the same period, with some materials being significantly more expensive. So Party B will also be reluctant to agree to the information price for the same period. This leads to misunderstandings between Party A and Party B during the final settlement. The general outcome of the negotiations is to divide the material difference into two parts. Material difference 1 = Information price in the current period – Information price in the base period ； Material variance 2 = Actual purchase price – Information price for the same period. A material difference of one is acceptable, but a difference of two is quite ambiguous. These points that can lead to misunderstandings between the two parties are specified in advance at the time of signing the contract; this facilitates pricing for the contractor and eliminates any terms that could cause confusion, thereby greatly simplifying the process of reviewing the project costs. If the initial contract isn’t very thorough, how can we achieve better results during the subsequent settlement? First, it is necessary to understand what common issues arise when construction companies submit their settlement documents: 1. Overstating the volume of work; 2. Reporting the same amounts multiple times or submitting duplicate requests for adjustments; 3. Misinterpreting contract terms; 4. Being vague regarding the specific areas that require adjustments; 5. Altering the content of those adjustment requests; 6. Changing the codes used in the pricing standards; 7. In projects where labor costs are considered, altering the labor cost figures to increase the total project cost; 8. Changing the amounts calculated automatically by budgeting software, such as the costs associated with the height of a building; 9. Inventing fake work items. To address these issues in the settlement submissions made by contractors, the following measures can be taken: Prepare thoroughly before conducting the review, 1. Become familiar with the construction drawings. Construction drawings are an important basis for compiling and reviewing the quantities involved in settlements; it is necessary to have a thorough understanding of them, check all the drawings, and after verifying that everything is correct, proceed to examine them one by one. 2. Understand the scope covered by settlement. According to the pre-budget preparation instructions, understand the scope of work included in the settlement. Such as supporting facilities, outdoor pipelines, roads, and design changes resulting from the review of drawings. 3. Determine the unit price list being used. Any unit pricing table or budget quota has a certain scope of application; it is necessary to gather information on the corresponding unit prices and quotas based on the nature of the project. Adopt appropriate review methods: 1. Group calculation review method. This method involves dividing the items in the preliminary budget into several groups, grouping together those that are connected and have certain internal relationships. It involves examining or calculating the quantity of work for one item within a given group, and by utilizing the fact that the quantities have the same or similar calculation bases, it is possible to determine the accuracy of the calculations for the other items within that same group. 2. Comparative review method. This method is a technique for comparing and reviewing the budget of a proposed similar project by using the preliminary estimates and final accounts of completed projects, or those of projects that have not been completed but for which estimates have been reviewed and revised. The two projects use the same construction drawings ； The two designs are identical, but their floor areas differ ； When two projects have the same area but not exactly identical design drawings, they need to be treated differently. 3. Comprehensive review method. For projects with relatively small volumes of work and simple processes, where the technical capacity for preparing cost estimates and final accounts is limited, the comprehensive review method can be employed. The specific review process under this method is essentially the same as budget preparation; it is relatively comprehensive and meticulous. As a result, the number of errors in the reviewed project budgets is relatively low, and their quality is relatively high. However, the workload involved is considerable. 4. Key sampling inspection method. Pay special attention to reviewing projects with large volumes of work, high costs, or complex structures; supplement the unit price tables, and determine the basis for calculating various expenses as well as the relevant charging standards. This method features a short review time, clear focus, and good results. 5. Index review method. Although construction projects vary in floor area and height, the quantities, costs, and labor requirements for their various components remain relatively constant per unit area. By aggregating these data and selecting the most relevant values, three basic tables are created for quantities, costs, and labor, with the applicable building standards indicated. In the settlement review, no matter how complex the situation may be, as long as the review is carried out under fair conditions and within the limits set by the quotas and contract documents, and an outcome is achieved in which the cost for Party A is reasonable while the contractor earns a certain profit, then our ultimate goal as cost professionals has been fulfilled.