THE UNFORESEEN CONDITION CLAUSE: POLICY CONSIDERATIONS AND THE CALIFORNIA ALTERNATIVE

The authors argue that the Unforeseen Condition Clause, originally devised to enable the Federal Government to settle broad of contract claims without the concurrence of certain legislative bodies, should not be used by state governments. At the state level, it both unnecessary (State agencies usually have the authority to settle breach of contract claims) and counterproductive (Rather than expediting claims, it has been a source of more litigation than any other clause in Federal contracts). This article describes the alternative mechanisms used in California to reduce risk. For example, subsurface investigations are often undertaken, with the results being made available to bidders with a disclaimer against relying on the accuracy of the data and inviting bidders to undertake their own investigation. Unit based contracts rather lump sum bids are used to reduce the risk of performing more work than estimated. Specifications for individual projects can also be written in a way to reduce risks in unique or unusual circumstances.

Media Info

Subject/Index Terms

Filing Info

  • Accession Number: 00388753
  • Record Type: Publication
  • Files: TRIS, TRB
  • Created Date: Oct 30 1984 12:00AM