Security Plan

[sinalpha]

I am resurrecting this thread because ....

Having agreed and signed a contract for work, our contractor has come back to say he needs to provide 'recinzione' to comply with security regs and implicit in this is that it will be an extra for us to fund. Or we can sign a statement to say that we don't consider 'recinzione' necessary and discharge him from responsibility - I think that means assume responsibility ourselves.

The latter option doesn't seem wise even though we are in a rural and isolated site.

The contract includes some apparently standard clauses to the effect that the contractor is responsible for safety and security of the cantiere and for workers and third parties. I would assume that includes making the site safe with the necessary fencing.

Our contract with the Geometra is specific in charging the cost of security to the contractor. I realise the contractor is not party to this contract and so cannot be tied - the Geometra provided the contract between us and the contractor.

The contractor is obscuring the position by suggesting that the prior contractor (we have changed contractor) should have provided the 'recinzione' and left it on site until completion of works. Frankly, that sounds rubbish - why and how would someone not currently contracted for work be obliged to leave 'recinzione' on site for an indefinite period?

I'm guessing the contractor has either omitted to include this and has been pulled up by the Geometra or is looking to recoup the price reduction we originally negotiated. Either way this does not seem to fall into the contractual clause for 'lavori non previsti'.

Comments from informed forum members gratefully received.

[timwills]

Please do not negotiate around this - and check the insurance of whoever is responsible.
We have some Italian friends who had people they grew up with working on their house, someone died falling off a plank put over a deepditch as a shortcut for wheelbarrows.
The court case is for €5,000,000.