Who is responsible for the on-site assembly and welding of the equipment?
Thread Content
This post was last edited by ms3210 on 2009-10-14 at 19:05. The on-site assembly welding of the equipment involves a large amount of work. The contract states that the manufacturer is responsible for this task, but they only sent personnel without bringing any welding equipment or other tools needed for the work; they asked the owner to provide such equipment. Additionally, a crane was required, and the owner was also asked to cover the cost of the crane. Is this reasonable? I would appreciate it if friends who have had similar experiences could share their insights
The on-site assembly and welding of the equipment shall be carried out by the construction unit specified in the contract.
It depends on what was stipulated in the contract between the two parties initially; in any case, the contract must be followed!
What about the contract? In a situation like this, it should be described very clearly; otherwise, your contract must be quite vague
This post was last edited by ms3210 on 2009-10-14 at 19:06. Since the contract clearly specifies that it is the manufacturer’s responsibility, how can one still ask whether it is reasonable for the owner to provide it? . Obviously, it’s unclear whether the contract specifies the scope of on-site welding. Usually, some equipment does require on-site assembly or welding, but these details should be specified in the contract. If the contract signed by the owner’s personnel is vague and results in work needing to be carried out on site, the owner should assign the installation company to carry out or assist with the on-site alignment or installation work.
This post was last edited by clguan on 2009-10-14 at 18:04. The key lies in the contract you sign with the manufacturer :) A large part of the reason for such issues is the lack of thoroughness in contract drafting, or the use of low-cost contracts that haven’t been carefully reviewed, which gives others an opportunity to take advantage of the situation. Personal opinion: The equipment is delivered in assembled sections; the on-site assembly and welding are usually carried out by the manufacturer, provided that the goods specified in the contract are to be manufactured as a complete unit. If the contract only covers the manufacturing of individual equipment components (such as shell plates), then the on-site assembly and welding fall under the responsibility of the installation party. Suggestion: Check the specific terms of the contract. If the total price already includes the assembly and welding of the equipment, and if it specifies the conditions and requirements that the client must provide on-site, then the contract should be followed. As long as you are not in breach of any terms, you can deduct the corresponding amount from the total contract price ； Otherwise, we’ll have to discuss it differently :) . For reference!
Under normal circumstances, the manufacturer provides on-site technical support; it depends on what is specified in the contract. If the manufacturer is responsible for this, it will certainly take relevant costs into account when setting the contract price, and the procedures must be carried out strictly in accordance with the terms of the contract.
This post was last edited by ms3210 on 2009-10-14 at 19:10. It should be the manufacturer who is responsible; it’s necessary to check what the contract stipulates. Not just anyone can weld such equipment – specific qualifications are required. Who will be responsible for any quality issues that arise after welding? What about after-sales service? Disputes may arise. For a small number of devices, the owner can provide some tools or something; why should people have to travel a long distance carrying a bunch of tools just to fix a minor issue?
This post was last edited by ms3210 on 2009-10-15 07:06. Before making any decisions, check the contract first and act in accordance with its terms. If, as the original poster says, it falls under the manufacturer’s responsibility, then there’s no doubt that the manufacturer not only has to bear the costs of equipment rental and labor, but can also demand payment for using the premises. However, from the perspective of solving the problem, it is necessary to ask whether the people from the manufacturer mentioned by the original poster are responsible for technical guidance, or whether they also include operators such as welders and riveters. If it is the former case, it is also common to cut out the entire welded assembly on site and hand it over to the construction party on site (as construction firms generally have the necessary qualifications for this), with the costs being deducted from the equipment cost. Alternatively, coordinate so that the construction contractor and the manufacturer negotiate directly, with the owner focusing on controlling the schedule and quality. Of course, in practice, when owners consider various factors comprehensively, for long-term goals such as progress and quality, certain matters can be negotiated.
Generally, it should be the responsibility of the manufacturer; otherwise, things will get complicated if problems arise. As for providing the equipment and covering the lifting costs, it depends on what is specified in the contract.
Thank you to all of you. The contract only specifies that the manufacturer is responsible for assembly; issues related to the machinery are not mentioned, but they should be included within the assembly responsibilities.