Thank you for the opportunity to address these concerns. MatriScope’s original estimate for the duration of inspection services required for
the project was provided with the input of the client’s steel supplier/installer. The contractor had initially indicated that the inspection services should be for only one day of shop welding but the work that required inspections took two days in total MatriScope’s standard agreements are an estimate since our services are largely to witness construction activities in a shop or field environment in which we have no control over the amount of labor that is being used for production or other impacts that may affect the contractor’s overall duration of the services. Once the shop inspections concluded the client’s contractor continued to dispatch MatriScope out to the project site to provide special inspection services. The contractor dispatching MatriSope is not unique but required per the City of San Francisco memorandum AB-which mandates that the contractor is to dispatch the special inspection services. Since the agreement between the two parties is for “time and material”, the additional services MatriScope performed as dispatched by the contractor per the city requirements were billed on time and material basis in accordance with our agreement. The client was aware of the services being performed in the shop and in the field since he was the sole recipient of our daily field reports and invoices. The inspections that were performed on site are required to be continuously inspected as defined by the California Building Code, San Francisco Building Code Amendments and outlined in Section “D1” of AB-046. MatriScope’s agreement with the client states that an inspector needs to be onsite within hours of being requested. If a special inspector had not been present during the welding then the resulting work would have been rejected by the City and be at risk of having to be removed and reworked at an even larger cost to the owner. MatriScope continued to provide special inspections services per our agreement to help ensure that the project would not be impacted. The client’s invoices were paid via the credit card that was provided during the project setup once the invoices were of days of age per our agreement.
I am rejecting this response because:I asked specific numbered questions to the Business requesting clarificationThey did NOT provide answers to themIf they are willing to reduce their invoice based on the items, we can resolve this once and for all.Thanks.?
Thank you for the opportunity to address these concerns. MatriScope’s original estimate for the duration of inspection services required for...
the project was provided with the input of the client’s steel supplier/installer. The contractor had initially indicated that the inspection services should be for only one day of shop welding but the work that required inspections took two days in total. MatriScope’s standard agreements are an estimate since our services are largely to witness construction activities in a shop or field environment in which we have no control over the amount of labor that is being used for production or other impacts that may affect the contractor’s overall duration of the services. Once the shop inspections concluded the client’s contractor continued to dispatch MatriScope out to the project site to provide special inspection services. The contractor dispatching MatriSope is not unique but required per the City of San Francisco memorandum AB-046 which mandates that the contractor is to dispatch the special inspection services. Since the agreement between the two parties is for “time and material”, the additional services MatriScope performed as dispatched by the contractor per the city requirements were billed on time and material basis in accordance with our agreement. The client was aware of the services being performed in the shop and in the field since he was the sole recipient of our daily field reports and invoices. The inspections that were performed on site are required to be continuously inspected as defined by the California Building Code, San Francisco Building Code Amendments and outlined in Section “D1” of AB-046. MatriScope’s agreement with the client states that an inspector needs to be onsite within 24 hours of being requested. If a special inspector had not been present during the welding then the resulting work would have been rejected by the City and be at risk of having to be removed and reworked at an even larger cost to the owner. MatriScope continued to provide special inspections services per our agreement to help ensure that the project would not be impacted. The client’s invoices were paid via the credit card that was provided during the project setup once the invoices were of 30 days of age per our agreement.
I am rejecting this response because:I asked 6 specific numbered questions to the Business requesting clarification. They did NOT provide answers to them. If they are willing to reduce their invoice based on the 6 items, we can resolve this once and for all.Thanks.
Thank you for the opportunity to address these concerns. MatriScope’s original estimate for the duration of inspection services required for
the project was provided with the input of the client’s steel supplier/installer. The contractor had initially indicated that the inspection services should be for only one day of shop welding but the work that required inspections took two days in total MatriScope’s standard agreements are an estimate since our services are largely to witness construction activities in a shop or field environment in which we have no control over the amount of labor that is being used for production or other impacts that may affect the contractor’s overall duration of the services. Once the shop inspections concluded the client’s contractor continued to dispatch MatriScope out to the project site to provide special inspection services. The contractor dispatching MatriSope is not unique but required per the City of San Francisco memorandum AB-which mandates that the contractor is to dispatch the special inspection services. Since the agreement between the two parties is for “time and material”, the additional services MatriScope performed as dispatched by the contractor per the city requirements were billed on time and material basis in accordance with our agreement. The client was aware of the services being performed in the shop and in the field since he was the sole recipient of our daily field reports and invoices. The inspections that were performed on site are required to be continuously inspected as defined by the California Building Code, San Francisco Building Code Amendments and outlined in Section “D1” of AB-046. MatriScope’s agreement with the client states that an inspector needs to be onsite within hours of being requested. If a special inspector had not been present during the welding then the resulting work would have been rejected by the City and be at risk of having to be removed and reworked at an even larger cost to the owner. MatriScope continued to provide special inspections services per our agreement to help ensure that the project would not be impacted. The client’s invoices were paid via the credit card that was provided during the project setup once the invoices were of days of age per our agreement.
I am rejecting this response because:I asked specific numbered questions to the Business requesting clarificationThey did NOT provide answers to themIf they are willing to reduce their invoice based on the items, we can resolve this once and for all.Thanks.?
Thank you for the opportunity to address these concerns. MatriScope’s original estimate for the duration of inspection services required for...
the project was provided with the input of the client’s steel supplier/installer. The contractor had initially indicated that the inspection services should be for only one day of shop welding but the work that required inspections took two days in total. MatriScope’s standard agreements are an estimate since our services are largely to witness construction activities in a shop or field environment in which we have no control over the amount of labor that is being used for production or other impacts that may affect the contractor’s overall duration of the services. Once the shop inspections concluded the client’s contractor continued to dispatch MatriScope out to the project site to provide special inspection services. The contractor dispatching MatriSope is not unique but required per the City of San Francisco memorandum AB-046 which mandates that the contractor is to dispatch the special inspection services. Since the agreement between the two parties is for “time and material”, the additional services MatriScope performed as dispatched by the contractor per the city requirements were billed on time and material basis in accordance with our agreement. The client was aware of the services being performed in the shop and in the field since he was the sole recipient of our daily field reports and invoices. The inspections that were performed on site are required to be continuously inspected as defined by the California Building Code, San Francisco Building Code Amendments and outlined in Section “D1” of AB-046. MatriScope’s agreement with the client states that an inspector needs to be onsite within 24 hours of being requested. If a special inspector had not been present during the welding then the resulting work would have been rejected by the City and be at risk of having to be removed and reworked at an even larger cost to the owner. MatriScope continued to provide special inspections services per our agreement to help ensure that the project would not be impacted. The client’s invoices were paid via the credit card that was provided during the project setup once the invoices were of 30 days of age per our agreement.
I am rejecting this response because:I asked 6 specific numbered questions to the Business requesting clarification. They did NOT provide answers to them. If they are willing to reduce their invoice based on the 6 items, we can resolve this once and for all.Thanks.