Little progress on Cambridge-St Ives Guided Busway defects

14:00 12 June 2010

guided bus

guided bus

Archant

TAXPAYERS in Cambridgeshire look set to have spent more than £40million too much by the time the Cambridge-Huntingdon guided busway is complete.

TAXPAYERS in Cambridgeshire look set to have spent more than £40million too much by the time the Cambridge-Huntingdon guided busway is complete.

But the county council expects to get the money back for the heavily-delayed project from contractors BAM Nuttall by 2014/15, under a ‘pain-gain’ sharing clause in the contract.

In the meantime, there is still no progress in ticking-off remedial work on defects on the northern section of the guideway between St Ives and Cambridge Science Park.

“There has been some work, but BAM has not made as quick progress as it set down in its own timetable, which is frustrating,” a county council spokesman said yesterday.

The total cost of the project – originally estimated at £116.3million, including land and supervision expenses – is now forecast to top £161million, though the council believes it will end up having paid £118million for the busway, which was due for handing over in full – including the southern section between Cambridge and Trumpington – in February last year.

There is even some doubt about whether BAM will meet its own revised deadline for finishing the southern section by December.

In the meantime, the contractor continues to bill CCC each month for the actual cost of carrying out the work done on the project – although it knocks off almost £14,000 a day in liquidated damages because the scheme is so far behind schedule.

So far, the 15 months of delay since last February have reduced payments to the contractor by more than £6million. But CCC is still forecasting that it will be looking to recover £40.4million from BAM, plus interest.

In the meantime, the county is having to borrow the money – though at a much lower rate of interest than that specified in the contract, but CCC will need to be right about BAM’s ultimate liability.

The reality, of course, is that the argument is likely to be a lucrative one for the legal profession.

1 comment

  • I'm really surprised that BAM aren't making any effort. They must surely realise that this only adds to their already dubious rep. as a reliable firm.

    Report this comment

    Richard Flynn

    Saturday, June 12, 2010

More news stories

Yesterday, 14:05
ALS Food and Pharmaceutical of Chatteris was the 2014 Business of the Year. Your company could follow in their footsteps by entering one of these categories.

Fenland’s finest food firms, the companies that best look after their staff and the most effective environmentally-friendly initiatives will be among those celebrated at the 2015 Fenland Enterprise Business Awards.

Yesterday, 16:54
Survey results of FDC members

Only two thirds of Fenland’s 39 district councillors responded to a survey about going paperless from April next year – a move expected to be agreed by cabinet in September.

Yesterday, 12:42
Police on the scene of the collision on the Newmarket Road/Daniels Road roundabaout, Norwich. Photo : Steve Adams

Police used a taser to detain a man following a collision involving three vehicles in Norwich yesterday that included a Ford Escort stolen from March at the weekend.

Yesterday, 17:25
Wisbech free car boot sale

I believe that the owner of the Rose and Crown in Wisbech has every right to be properly concerned about what the town council are doing to Wisbech Market Place.

Most read stories

Digital Edition

Image
Read the Cambs Times e-edition today E-edition