Precedent setting in long term contracts

[rob900]

Good afternoon.
I would appreciate some advice on the following issue.
I have recently taken over the management of a long term maintenance contract with a London borough council.
We are 3 and a half years through the 4 years duration.
Early in the contract and well before my time, the terms of the contract appear to have been 'renegotiated' between the contract managers for the council and our company. This appears to have involved an unwritten agreement to modify the working processes of the contract as both parties agreed that many details were not workable or fair.
(Needless to say the council contract manager was not involved in the wording).
This arrangement remained in place and working smoothly, with quotes for works being agreed and signed off by the council, work being carried out and invoiced presented and paid - until 3 months ago when the council contract manager moved on and was replaced. The replacement immediately went to the contract, studied it thouroughly and then contacted me with a few questions!
He is insisting that from this point on we comply 100% with contract terms.
Although we have obviously not been working to the letter of the contract but to the 'revised' agreement, does the fact that the council have been complict in the arrangement to until recently give us any grounds to argue that a precendent has been set and it is unreasonable for them to expect us to make changes to our working practices at this late stage?
Sorry its a bit of an essay but I'd appreciate any thoughts. Rob

 

[johnt5293]

Well, if you are 3 1/2 years into a 4 year contract meaning there isn't long left, and there is a new person in charge at the council, it would seem a good idea (if you are wanting the contract to be re-newed) to honour the written contract for its remainder, and re-negotiate at renewal to be closer to the unwritten version that has worked so well, when the time comes...

 

[rob900]

Thanks for your reply. The story goes that as soon as the alarm was raised (as it were) we immeditely set about trying to correct the issues and have spent the last 6 months gradually trying to get things in order which is inevitably costing us a great deal of time, effort and money.
The pressure from the council since then has been relentless, the blame having been placed firmly in our court.
The reason for my post was to try and ascertain if people thought that in the circumstances both parties should take a portion of the blame for the situation, and some responsibility accepted by the council - given that in my view they are complicit in creating the situation we find ourselves in.
I am not trying to avoid responsibility for the situation - yes we are at fault , having signed and agreed the contract.
However I am tring to build a valid arguement that we are not entirely to blame....even though I have no concrete evidence.
Rob