Unsupported browser

For a better experience please update your browser to its latest version.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We use cookies to personalise your experience; learn more in our Privacy and Cookie Policy. You can opt out of some cookies by adjusting your browser settings; see the cookie policy for details. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies.

Report this comment to a moderator

Please fill in the form below if you think a comment is unsuitable. Your comments will be sent to our moderator for review.
By submitting your information you agree to our Privacy & Cookie Policy.

Report comment to moderator

Required fields.


Rydon director denies ‘secret deal’ with client on Grenfell contract win


Here is yet another example of why the need for genuine value engineering ends up being cost cutting and inappropriate compromising. People like to call it value engineering because that makes it sound more professional but those holding the purse strings need to appreciate how critical it is to understand that the consequences of such changes and who REALLY needs to be consulted. They kid themselves those they are talking to know what they do but too often the latter do not. Having started as a site manager back in 1984 before moving to design, I still have some appreciation of what it can be like on site. It does seem as though a much more thorough authorisation procedure for material supplier changes needs to be implemented across the industry. Jeffrey - an engineer - comments made via the IHS

Posted date

30 July, 2020

Posted time

7:15 am