Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'latent defect'.
Found 1 result
I am a federal government manager, serviced by a centralized contracting operation. During the ARRA period, we contracted for some outdoor trail exhibits that were to be fabricated by etching features into corten steel. (The exhibits are life-size, depicting a standing person. Features include the facial features, hands, etc.) Contract was design/build. Exhibits were delivered and installed, but within the warranty period the exhibits began to come apart. What we found out was that the exhibits were not etched, but instead fabricated from separate pieces that were glued on to appear as if they were etched. The glued-on pieces are falling off. I can send pictures to anyone interested. The prime contractor states that he did not know the sub would take this approach, and he is willing to replace all the exhibits under warranty. However, it now appears that etching in corten as envisioned is not possible, so the new items will be etched in aluminum and painted to resemble corten. We are willing to accept this approach, but since we do not have good experience with the replacement product, I believe we should ask for an extension of the warranty period in consideration. The contracting officer is unwilling to ask for the extension. My thought is that this is not exactly a latent defect, but is also not what we agreed upon. I have no issue with accepting the replacements, but would like a 3-year warranty just in case something else unforeseen comes up. The contractor states that the replacement materials have been used in other applications and should last 20 or more years, so I'm thinking that a 3-year warranty should not be an issue if in fact the replacement items are as durable as they say. In other words, I believe that in consideration of us accepting an alternative, the contractor should offer something in return (3-year warranty). I would appreciate any thoughts or comments. Thanks