Leinster House Bicycle Shed

i,d imagine to build anything in that location it has to pass through multiple committees and planning as regards design and use of materials .i,d like to see a full list of costs , i think the whole area around it has to designed eg materials used ,is it concrete, granite etc its funny theres no cover at the sides so it could still get wet in heavy rain.i think a one bed apartment costs around 200k to build minus vat and minus the cost of the land. It,s probably a one off design .

i think you could ask a company to build a standard bike shed for 20k max.

i think the opw must have a very complex system of working with contractors

to spend over 300k on a bike shed. This is going to show up in international newspapers and news websites like fark and drudge.com .

Favours and paybacks come into play.

Leinster House "bike shed"?

It's quite obviously not a bike shed, more like a shelter or awning, but it's not a shed.

Apologists starting to creep in.

We're not thick. We know of project scope creep and sunken cost considerations.

Words won't dilute the cost vs the itemisation that we are left with on what is now day 3 of the exposure.

Procurement got shafted here.

Not their money, so we paid.

I have worked for multinationals with big dollar names. Some potential suppliers would send in preposterous top level quotes for projects.

"They've got dollars and deep pocket" attitude.

Ask for itemisation and cost breakdowns and many would go silent.

Some just quoted using Anglo-Irish Bank "process" for estimating.

Although one brass-kneck presented an itemisation of a single line item for €5k.

This was for a floodlight above an outside plant room area, where there was already a lighting point.

I kid you not. He has never originally itemised but then had to reverse engineer and somehow get everything to add to €350k.

My estimate...€500 labour and materials for that line item.

There were other bizarre itemisations, but that specific line was enough to say good luck.

So, if I had not done my job, I could easily have accepted the quote from "sound man ex-footballer.

That particular facilities project, quotes ranged from €160k to €350k.

And yes the deliverables were similar as the RFQ (request for quotation) was clear.

Quite likely here that "sound man" got the bike shed job.

You never answered mine. I told you what my experience is and have answered your question. So we will have to agree to disagree and let others on here make up their own mind.

Your saying that a customer/client will/should pay full costs no matter how much more the final bill is as apposed to what was agreed at the start of a project without question or explanation. I have agreed that there are cases where this happens in the private sector but its rare and it happens way to much in the public sector. I have never had a case where someone just pays without any kind of review/audit/explanation of the cost differential. So let others make up their own mind.

Also the comment at the end I tell you I would hate to have someone like you looking after a project that I was funding as you would empty my bank account and tell me just keep paying and take it. Do you work in the public sector by any chance.

I'd say a Dee Forbes will be pulled and whoever is responsible will sail off into the sunset.

So he is saying now it would cost 100k?

He left that out of the tweet.

The reality is he hasn't a clue how much he would quote for it because like most people he doesn't know what level of work went into it.

That said they are not helping themselves here, the "breakdown" of costs they released was an absolute joke.

Oh yeah, I'll get right on it 🙄

I don't need to.

He is not getting that level of finish for 7k or 20k like he claimed in his tweet. Nor has he any idea what scope of works the contractor(s) were tasked with.

What part of that is confusing you?

You never answered the questions and are missing parts of information in the scenario. The client is informed at every point of rising costs and why by the consultant firm. You seem to be saying a company should do work for free and ignoring the requirements changed from the start and the initial quote. The consultant company provided everything they said they would.
I am asking you who is responsible and how to stop it happening again? Saying a project manager would solve the problem is nonsense as they couldn’t change anything all they would be doing is telling the client what has happened. Initial spec/details were incomplete from the client so the quote doesn’t include the additional work which then gets charged. Further considerations were also added which again is more work. Then an issue is discovered in the code requires even more work. You are saying all this extra work should be provided for free by the consultant. It doesn’t work like that with a plumber in your own home so why would it work like that with services for any company or state body?
A good project manager has to keep an eye on costs, time and scope. When a client starts to expand the scope beyond the agreement they are meant to stop it or make the client pay for additional work. Totally different to trying to charge more for agreed work which was never part of the scenario I gave. I wouldn’t want you as a client if you kept moving the goalposts of what work was agreed and expecting it for free.