In 2016, Highways England volunteered there was a pain/gain share (expectation & assessment) between the contractor and the Authority; it existed. But no contractor had ever achieved the threshold such that the Authority’s ‘gain’ was engaged and the contractor’s monthly lumpsum payment reduced, their ‘pain’. the public purse forked out the monies without reduction.
- Answer – they provided false information to Highways England too!
In late 2018, we reviewed a specific claim and learned Kier were supplying Highways England with false information. Kier Highways were not only overstating claims to Third Parties, they were also submitting overstated claim costs to Highways England. We alerted the Authority.
But without explaining why Kier Highways would be presenting the false data, Highways England U-turned; there was no pain/gain share, they had provided incorrect information. Then …
12/11/2019 At a tribunal, an Authority witness told the Judges there was a pain/gain share; ‘the costs charged would be based on the ASC target rates but would then be subject to the ‘pain/gain’ adjustment process under the contract’ para. 15 of the Judgement. We returned to the Authority seeking information about the ‘share’.
It would be foolhardy to place any reliance upon information emanating from Highways England. Their written word requires substantiation, corroboration. Should a disclosure cause embarrassment, they are likely to turn on a sixpence, apologise and provide a lacklustre, obstructive explanation.
the action or practice of deceiving someone by concealing or misrepresenting the truth.