what would you do if you bid on some work and lost the bid to another company and when the other company started doing the job you noticed that the materials that they were using were not the materials that the bid sheet specified. The supervisor / inspector on the job has let material like this slide in the past - several years- and if and when this is brought to light it may put a contractor under that has been getting most of these bids, due to replacement costs. May cost the inspector and his boss their jobs. options are this. 1. Do nothing and don't bid on future projects because one can't compete and use specified materials 2. If they can get away with it I can too. 3. Blow the whistle, specs are specs.
Is it public works or a private owner? Do you know if maybe the other guy went to the owner with a proposed cost savings for lesser material? You say this has happened before, did you bring up the question in the pre bid meeting, if there was one? Maybe there is more to it than meets the eye. If it is public works, I would probably complain, but for a private owner you may just shoot yourself out of any further opportunities.
public work being paid for out of public funds, overseen by a department of enviromental protection person type person, and that office would get most of the pie in the face so to speak.
Not enough people are speaking up!!1 this is why these lowballers are still around and still making $$$$. Whether or not anyone will listen.... now that is a whole nother matter.
you've taken a sample of their material to a soils engineer, and know for a fact...that the material supplied, installed...doesn't meet spec? i'd blow the whistle. you're going to want to know and have that "professional opinion" before you do this though. might be a touch embarrassing if the sample passes.
Tough situation. I was inspecting the construction of a new RR crossing for the RR. I questioned the municipality's engineer (new grad) on the materials being used to build the approaches. He assured me that it was tested and meet specs. I suspected that wasn't the case and went back on the weekend and took my own samples and had them tested. It was running 13-18 percent on the P200 instead of the 6% max. I questioned him again the next week. He insisted again it met specs. I took my test results and put them in the file. I suspected it might come up again and the municipality would come after the RR to rebuild the approaches. Sure enough, within about 4 years the approaches were all broke up (freeze thaw did a job on all that silt )and I expected the municipality would come knocking for money to rebuild. Well the engineer had moved on and there was a new City manager, so the subject never came up. In your case, if it's been occurring in the past, I suspect the inspector might be on the take. If his boss shows up on the job, he should be able to see what's happening, so he might be in on it as well. Even with some test result's to back you up, unless you find someone above these 2 willing take it on, you're going to called a disgruntled guy that didn't get the bid. If I were you, I wouldn't bother to bid their work anymore At least you'll know where this guy will be working. If he's busy there, he won't be bidding other places.
All that being said, if in your opinion it is an immediate safety issue, then if you don't want to get involved, call a local TV investigative reporter and tip them to the story. Here in north Texas the gas company has a gazillion aging and possibly leaking G couplings in the shifting expansive black clay. A number of houses have blown up or burned recently because of the problem. No one was going to do anything about it until the local investigative news guy spent 4 years researching the problem. His work finally got the Texas Railroad Commission to force the gas company to do something about the problem. There are all kinds of ways contractors bend the rules to get bids and make a buck. It isn’t right but if that’s what the market demands then play the game or go somewhere where the rules actually apply. This is a perfect example of where effective government (honest inspectors and iron clad specifications) would eliminate the possibility of cheating. I wonder how places in complete anarchy like Afghanistan or Mexico can maintain any QC over work done with the amount of graft, which plainly exists there.
Is it possible that they proposed a substitution for the materials specified? If it were me, I would want to know if that were allowed and I would want to see test reports from an appropriate lab or a sign off from a PE. A lot of time to invest for possibly not really a gain to you, but on the other hand if it's a public project, you could save the taxpayers some money preventing a failure...on the other other hand you deny yourself the opportunity to bid a repair project. Of course if you know it's wrong, integrity requires it be reported to somebody.
I am always scared of how high the kick backs go. The mayor could be getting paid off for all you know lol and we know people dont like being exposed more so if anyone stands to lose some cash income. When I bid if I get it great If I don't I forget it was tenderd and move on no sense making waves that could hurt me in the future. But if it's the only show in town for work well you might wana speak up what are you guna lose if you have no work at all. I would speak up if it ment going under. It's a tough place to be and im glad im not in your shoes.
the "assumption" here is.....the material does NOT meet spec. until you have it tested, do you know 100% for sure? were you called into a court room, and the judge asks you for your "professional" opinion, could you give it to him? have it tested, and then make the accusation publicly. right now to me, if i lived in the area and heard it "through the grapevine"...to me as joe six pack...i'd consider it a matter of sour grapes...now IF you had proof that the materials provided, placed were not meeting spec, you'd have some pretty good bullets to be shooting with.