Warranty and LP9
S
Stahl, Friedemann
The specification of the warranty period has already been discussed under Canny's point “Warranty period should be specifiable”. However, this is not enough for us in most cases, for the following reasons:
- The warranty period should be able to be entered for every contract, incl. Acceptance date.
- LP 9 must be specially provided with messages.
- The acceptance date for architect/engineering services must be differentiated from the acceptance date of the executing companies (trades).
- In addition, there are architectural and engineering contracts without acceptance, where the implied acceptance is the acceptance date, i.e. the full payment of the invoice or final invoice.
I have the following suggestion for the acceptance of architect/engineering services:
- Automated acceptance is built into Projo upon full payment of the final invoice (implied — tacit — acceptance). If the final invoice is not paid in full, according to legal interpretation, no implied acceptance has taken place, so a report must then be received. This lack of implied acceptance can only be countered by written acceptance. The corresponding fields should be reserved for this purpose.
- A formal acceptance is actually carried out. For this purpose, fields must be provided, again for each contract in accordance with the contract structure.
For approval of the executing trades:
The acceptance date of the executing trades is of great importance for planning offices when LP 9 is commissioned. It must then be possible to track the end of the warranty. My suggestion:
a. For each contract in accordance with the contract structure, it must be possible to enter several acceptance data in Projo, separately for each cost group listed in the contract. By acceptance data, I mean the date of acceptance, the warranty period, the calculated end of warranty and a comment field.
b. In addition, Projo should automatically recognize from the contract structure whether LP 9 has been commissioned and generate a report from this, which, for example, goes internally to defined persons 3 months before the end of the warranty period of the executing company (e.g. project manager, supervisor). The project has already been archived at this point in time. However, at the time of generating this message, LP 9 could be opened automatically (or experience another defined status change) and the project would then appear in the project list.
We currently watch LP 9 over 30 times. The changes would help us a lot.
Arne Semmler
On the second part “Assistant to remind you of expiring trade union warranty in LP 9": I would first recommend that you use the “Contract Deadlines” function, for example to “remind” the expiration of the warranty of the first trades after, for example, 3.5 years:
S
Stahl, Friedemann
Arne Semmler: I can only use the “Contract Deadlines” function once per project. In the case of supplements, there are sometimes new and additional deadlines, which should be specified. In addition, each cost group usually has its own acceptance date.
S
Stahl, Friedemann
I used the contract deadlines and am now waiting for an automated message from projo.
S
Stahl, Friedemann
I have now tested contract deadlines several times. There is no automated reporting. You must therefore continue to keep your own lists accordingly so as not to miss anything here.
S
Stahl, Friedemann
Arne Semmler: I have now tested contract deadlines several times. There is no automated reporting. You must therefore continue to keep your own lists accordingly so as not to miss anything here.
Arne Semmler
Hi Stahl, Friedemann! Interesting idea, although from my point of view more like two Canny points - on the one hand the “assistant” for recording your own acceptance and on the other hand the “assistant” for tracking the warranty periods in LP 9. On the first point, the following note: If projo recognizes a contract with an acceptance date for which there is no final invoice, projo is already reminding you of the final invoice by notification. Conversely, when setting the status “accepted”, projo wants to know which invoice is to be regarded as the final invoice and also suggests the implied acceptance (called “tacit” in our case). Conversely, I understand that you would also like to receive a warning if a contract with a final invoice does not yet have an acceptance date and no warranty period is specified.
S
Stahl, Friedemann
Arne Semmler: That's right. That could be 2 Canny points. Yes, we are testing this for the approval of planning services. However, if payment of the final invoice is incomplete, no report has yet been received that the (implied) acceptance is missing here.
In the end, it is sufficient if a planning contract is accepted in writing or an implied acceptance takes place. If one of the two is missing, a message is very important.