So you completed a survey work. Submitted your work to your client. Showed all the markers & control points to the site engineer. Received your final pay. Everything is completed.Everyone satisfied.
1 week after, the client calls up & request that you visit their site office for some "clarificatory" meeting.
I asked them what the questions are so I can maybe answer them by email or over the phone. They say they wanted all persons involved on the project to be on board during the meeting.
Do you charge for this meeting? It seems that they are thinking that this is still part of what they paid me.
If you charge for it? How much? Per hour basis? Per consultation basis?
I'd charge for all the other people, but not for myself. Because these other persons are being pulled off other paying jobs to be there. But, this is your job.....
Just me thoughts.
N
It depends. It really depends on whether or not I will be doing anything in the future for them or if I think they are going to try to blame me for something. Normally, I wouldn't charge if it was a quicky meeting with no problems. Otherwise, they will get billed a minimum of two hours plus travel time. No need to discuss it ahead of time. Just invoice if you deem appropriate, document everything and be prepared to have to push to get paid if they are troublemakers. Do not let them off the hook unless it is one hundred percent your choice.
I really hate these "clarificatory" meetings. If you could not explain what your questions are then it is either:
1. They found something wrong with your work
2. Their engineer did a booboo with your survey work & control points & they are wondering if it was their engineer's fault or mine.
3. They are a bunch of meeting junkies that relish sitting around a conference table, drink a lot of coffee & enjoy updating their progress status charts.
From past experiences, most of the time, it is #2. I am checking my data & so far can't see anything that is a cause for alarm. :'(
Every proposal we send out has an exception that all fees listed are exclusive of meetings, telephone conversations, e-mails and other project administration.
Once in a while we have a client who does not read the proposal and thinks that they can call, e-mail or have site meetings as often as they like for the fee. Some clients expect to be invoiced for this time, others expect it to be included in the fee. I would prefer to work with the former and not the latter.
We have a very similar clause in all our quotations, specifically excluding any site meetings unless agreed in advance. With regards to e-mails and telephone calls we log these and if the amount starts to get excessive (definition of excessive depends on the job size) we notify the customer of the total to date and indicate that we are going to have to start charging. Most of them are taken aback at the time they have spent talking.
I would bill them on an hourly basis, yes.
Depends on the Client. Do they understand that my time is valuable or do they think that I just owe it to them? Are they and ongoing Client or is this probably the only project? Are there items on the survey that you know require some clarifications? I promise you an Attorney will be charging for their time.
>...the client calls up & request that you visit their site office for some "clarificatory" meeting.
Just insert the following image in an email.
Q.E.D.
No. It's the cost of doing business, and I do them happily. It makes for repeat customers. Also, if you keep track of it, you can kinda add it back into the next project.
Our job is to locate the lines so that the landowners can be good stewards of the property. If we don't do these meetings, then how do we ever expect the people to take care of the land.
With regard to commercial projects, it's just good business to help out.
I agree with you Kris. It is good business.
However, I would not send everyone involved with the survey that took place. I would go alone and consult with the field crew afterwards in-house if need be.
> I agree with you Kris. It is good business.
>
> However, I would not send everyone involved with the survey that took place. I would go alone and consult with the field crew afterwards in-house if need be.
Agreed and that's what we do.
> No. It's the cost of doing business, and I do them happily. It makes for repeat customers. Also, if you keep track of it, you can kinda add it back into the next project.
>
> Our job is to locate the lines so that the landowners can be good stewards of the property. If we don't do these meetings, then how do we ever expect the people to take care of the land.
>
> With regard to commercial projects, it's just good business to help out.
In theory that sounds good but many people will try and take advantage of you if you let them. I would try addressing this in your contract. Something to the effect of "1 hour of meeting time to go over results is included in the proposed rate. Any additional meeting time will be billed on an hourly basis." That being said I don't do a lot of small projects. If I am doing 25k of work for someone I am not going to complain if they want me to spend an hour after the fact going over it. As long as whatever they are asking doesn't get out of line with regards to what I charged for I don't mind.
While this thread has been going on I've actually had a situation arise.
In 2007 we surveyed a large hospital site, about 80 hectares. A contractor has now been appointed to carry out some development work and an e-mail arrives this morning from their engineer on site regarding location of control stations.
As part of the original survey we provided a full survey report, but apparently the Consultant has lost this, or can't be bothered to look in his archives (how unusual).
The lad on site needs to know NOW where the control is. Going out to site and back would take several hours - I might have considered that for the original Consultant if it were only a short time later, but 7 years later for a third party....
I've ended up talking him round the site, using Google map images to locate stations he can use and telling him under which bushes and grass to dig to find them. He now has enough information to work to, but it's really the Consultant's responsibility to ensure that he preserves the original supply of information and hands it on to the contractor.
You are being helpful. That is nice. However, I would first recommend that they hire you to locate AND VERIFY the worthiness of the control as it appears to exist today. Further, I would document this conversation in some way so that you are prepared should they have a problem at some point in the future and try to accuse you of being the source of their problem.
Verifying the control should not be a really big job for you, but a very worthwhile one for them.
Yes, I did tell him to check the distances and levels between the stations before he used them. If I need to go there then they would get charged.
After 7 years I reckon that any minor variations could well be down to ground movement. The original survey report gave all the traverse misclosures (all over 1:100,000).
Our policy is generally not to put survey station coordinates on the drawings - either put them in a full report showing the traverses, or a note on the drawing telling the contractor to ask. That way we can avoid some dummy setting up on a station from one traverse and sighting a station a few metres away on another traverse (now intervisible once the buildings have been knocked down).
We once had a site where a grid of stations was constructed every 100 metres. The contractor's engineer managed to set the works out transformed through 90 degrees, but he didn't bother to check the levels between stations, otherwise the mistake would have been obvious. (although you would have thought that the position of the sun was a clue!).
It's generally specified up front. I don't allow myself to be taken advantage of (unless I want to be). 🙂
I'm talking about a week or two, maybe a month. 7 years? No. Pay my fee.
Agreed. 7 year old nails have a way of "walking".
Mr. Fleming, you have the best quotes. The frog is my desktop for the week.
