Variations in construction contracts
A variation (sometimes referred to as a variation instruction, variation order or change order) is an alteration to the scope of works in a construction contract in the form of an addition, substitution or omission from the original scope of works.
Almost all construction projects vary from the original design, scope and definition. Whether small or large, construction projects will inevitably depart from the original tender design, specifications and drawings prepared by the design team.
This can be because of technological advancement, statutory changes or enforcement, change in conditions, geological anomalies, non-availability of specified materials, or simply because of the continued development of the design after the contract has been awarded. In large civil engineering projects variations can be very significant, whereas on small building contracts they may be relatively minor.
Variations may include:
- Alterations to the design.
- Alterations to quantities.
- Alterations to quality.
- Alterations to working conditions.
- Alterations to the sequence of work.
- Change the fundamental nature of the works.
- Omit work so that it can be carried out by another contractor.
- Be instructed after practical completion.
- Require the contractor to carry out work that was the subject of a prime cost sum.
In legal terms, a variation is an agreement supported by consideration to alter some terms of the contract. No power to order variation is implied, and so there must be express terms in contracts which give the power instruct variations. In the absence of such express terms the contractor may reject instructions for variations without any legal consequences.
Standard forms of contract generally make express provisions for the contract administrator (generally the architect or engineer) to instruct variations (for example, FIDIC Clause 51.1). Such provisions enable the continued, smooth administration of the works without the need for another contract.
 Valuation of variations
Variations may give rise to additions or deductions from the contract sum. The valuation of variations may include not just the work which the variation instruction describes, but other expenses that may result from the variation, such as the impact on other aspects of the works. Variations may also (but not necessarily) require adjustment of the completion date.
Variations may be valued by:
- Agreement between the contractor and the client.
- The cost consultant.
- A variation quotation prepared by the contractor and accepted by the client.
- By some other method agreed by the contractor and the client.
Valuations of variations are often based on the rates and prices provided by the contractor in their tender, provided the work is of a similar nature and carried out in similar conditions. This is true, even if it becomes apparent that the rates provided by the contractor were higher or lower than otherwise available commercial rates. The contractor's rates do not become reasonable or unreasonable by the execution of variations (see Henry Boot Construction v Alstom (2000)).
If similar types of works to those instructed by a variation cannot be found in the drawings, specification or bills of quantities, then fair valuation of the contractor's direct costs, overheads and profit is necessary.
'Assessment of compensation events as they affect Prices is based on their effect on Defined Cost plus the Fee. This is different from some standard forms of contract where variations are valued using the rates and prices in the contract as a basis. The reason for this policy is that no compensation event for which a quotation is required is due to the fault of the Contractor or relates to a matter which is at his risk under the contract. It is therefore appropriate to reimburse the Contractor his forecast additional costs (or actual costs if the work has already been done) arising from the compensation event.'
In other words, the contractor can ignore their tender pricing and claim cost plus on variations. However, there may be disagreements about items such as factory overheads and management which are very hard to evaluate. In addition, given the complexity and length of the supply chain in major building works, getting forecast pricing from all the parties affected takes time, often beyond the date by which the contract administrator has to make the decision as to whether or not to instruct the variation.
They may then have to decide whether or not to proceed with a variation based on estimates from the cost consultant which in due course get replaced by the actual cost. It has been argued that this practicality defeats the some of the rationale of the NEC contracts in relation to cost control and decision making.
 Source of conflict
Conflict can arise when work is not mentioned in the bills of quantities, drawings or specifications. In common law this silence does not mean the contractor has an automatic right to claim for extra payment. The client is not bound to pay for things that a reasonable contractor must have understood were to be done but which happen to be omitted from the bills of quantities.
Where there are items that, whilst they are not expressly mentioned, are nonetheless required in order to complete the works, then the contractor should have included them in their price. The bills of quantities and specification do not necessarily have to include 'every nail to be punched in'. For example, in fixing GRC façades it is necessary to have steel supports, and a reasonably experienced contractor must make provision for this in the contract price. Unless expressly excluded, such supports are not paid for as a variation.
Conflict can also arise when a sub-contractor qualifies that, for example, 'Supply & Fixing of Door is included' but 'Supply & Fixing of Ironmongery is excluded'. A reasonable sub-contractor should foresee that a door cannot be fixed without hinges – which is a part of the ironmongery. So even if ironmongery is excluded, the sub-contractor cannot expect a variation for any of the items required to fix the doors.
Also, under the pretext of variation, the contract administrator cannot change the nature of works. For example, if the contract provides for secant pile shoring, they cannot ask for diaphragm wall shoring as it will entirely change the nature of the work.
Further, if the contract administrator omits work from contractor’s scope, such an omission must be genuine: that is, the work omitted must be omitted from the contract entirely, it cannot be used to take work away from the contractor to give it to another (for example, see FIDIC Clause 51.1). Similarly, the contract administrator is not empowered to order variations to help the contractor if the contract works are proving too difficult or expensive for them.
Variations are often sources of dispute, either in valuing the variation, or agreeing whether part of the works constitute a variation at all, and can cost a lot of time and money during the course of a contract. Whilst some variations are unavoidable, it is wise to minimise potential variations and subsequent claims by ensuring that uncertainties are eliminated before awarding the contract.
This can be done by:
- Undertaking thorough site investigations and condition surveys.
- Ensuring that the project brief is comprehensive and is supported by stakeholders.
- Ensuring that legislative requirements are properly integrated into the project.
- Ensuring that risks are properly identified.
- Ensuring that designs are properly coordinated before tender.
- Ensuring the contract is unambiguous and explicit.
- Ensuring the contractor's rates are clear.
- Preparing concise drawings, bills of quantities and specifications, providing for all situations which are reasonably foreseeable.
 Related articles on Designing Buildings Wiki
- Abortive work.
- Architect's instruction.
- Bill of quantities.
- Change control procedures.
- Change order.
- Confirmation of verbal instruction.
- Compensation events.
- Construction contract.
- Contract documents.
- Defined cost.
- Delay damages.
- Extension of time.
- How to prepare a claim for an extension of time.
- Liquidated damages.
- Loss and expense.
- Oral variation to written contract.
- Outturn cost.
- Payment for extra work.
- Relevant event.
- Request for information.
- The difference between a prime cost and provisional sum.
 External references
- The JCT 05 Standard Building Contract: Law and Administration By Issaka Ndekugri, Michael Rycroft.
Featured articles and news
Urban Heritage, Development and Sustainability: international frameworks, national and local guidance.
What will the General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR) mean for you when they come into force in May?
Business Secretary chairs a new taskforce to monitor and advise on mitigating the impacts of Carillion’s liquidation.
Sir John Armitt is appointed the new chair of the National Infrastructure Commission.
High quality and high density homes - is it what we need or is it storing up trouble?
Government announces its intention to strengthen planning rules to protect music venues and neighbours.
National Audit Office reports that there is little evidence that PFI offers better value than other forms of contracting.
What is liquidation and how does it apply to contractors in the construction industry?
Scrutiny is placed on Carillion's controversial 2013 decision to extend subcontractor payment terms to 120 days.
RSHP unveil their involvement in a boundary crossing which will provide a new entry point into Hong Kong.
With PFI currently under the spotlight due to Carillion, this introductory article explains what they are.
Estimates suggest that up to 30,000 small firms could be at risk of non-payment as a result of Carillion's collapse.