Those in the field of heritage education, conservation, and preservation may more often approach such projects with more personal motivations than commercial gain. This is an understandable temptation, as it’s easy to get caught up in the project so much that you feel almost fused with it. However, for the sake of the project and the people involved, it is vital that everyone involved understands their roles, responsibilities, and methods.
Establishing this is not only done by assigning a curator to the project but through binding agreements. As such, it is important to understand situations where a contractor did work without contract. When this happens, it can be a serious challenge to hold them accountable for any mistakes made. Consider this example.
A stonework contractor implements a painstaking restoration on a building at risk for collapse. He repairs any damage as quickly as possible, yet there are some complications that arise. The original deterioration has spread and the chosen repair materials are now too patchy and abundant. This makes it look haphazard and the structural integrity still leaves something to be desired. So, what happens when the contractor does not produce the expected quality of work by the end of the project?
Without a contract that clearly defined the requirements for completion, the contractor may simply walk away with his profits. After all, it was not strictly stipulated that there needed to be a uniform aesthetic outcome, or that the structure is repaired rather than just patched. Thus, had this contractor done work without a contract, it would be difficult to hold him accountable or even have a case to take to Bill 132 – Construction Lien Act litigation.
Failure of clear agreements can be a big issue for many heritage education, conservation, and preservation projects. Whether a minor oversight during development or the absence of a pre-established measure to assess success, such miscommunication can lead to devastating results. It is important to note that this is not merely more likely to occur in larger, more high-value projects, nor is it limited to masonry.
Someone who cracks and improperly repairs a single brick in a low-profile building may end up leaving a major visible flaw that extends beyond the scope of the project. This is especially true if the individual has no work guarantee, or if the project does not have means of evaluation and measures of success. Your clients should know how to validate that they’ve gotten the work that’s been contracted for.
The issue of unclear agreements and demonstration of quality results is extremely high value in the preservation of heritage. This is particularly so with monumental historic properties. Even a small deviation from the original plans can have a ripple effect throughout the heritage community. Under the right circumstances, it can even lead to the designation of antiquity which is a very sensitive category.
That said, best practices recommendation for final review are acceptable as long as they are agreed upon by clients ahead of time. In some cases, it is possible to increase the budget for restoration in order to select this kind of highest-quality, most cost-efficient option.
For more information on construction contracts and legal obligations, you can visit USA.gov.