Contingency for renovating a 1,180 sq ft serviced apartment in Manchester

[bakesAndView]

The preliminary figure of £291,200 may sound ample for a 1,180 sq ft serviced apartment, but I hesitate to fix it before the concealed work and building constraints are clearer. This is a one-bedroom Manchester renovation without an extension, covering the principal rooms, finishes, electrical assessment and some energy improvements.

The biggest risks seem to be moisture behind finishes, restricted plumbing access and an electrical allowance that covers testing but not the resulting repairs. I also need to understand contractor exclusions, making-good costs and material lead times. What level of contingency would you retain at this stage, and which investigations would most reduce it before contracts are agreed?

 

[gate.strong]

At this stage I’d carry roughly 15%, then reduce it only when the intrusive information supports doing so. Ask every contractor to list exclusions beside the price, particularly making good after opening walls or floors, access equipment, waste removal, protection of common areas and work outside normal hours. Also clarify whether “electrical checks” means testing only or includes an allowance for remedial work.

 

[readTheEcho]

Is the apartment staying operational during the works, and what restrictions does the building management impose? Those answers could affect sequencing more than the finishes. Delivery slots, lift access, noisy-work periods and approval timing can turn a straightforward programme into several phases. I’d also ask whether the £291,200 includes temporary protection, storage and delays caused by long-lead materials.

 

[miro_ash]

I’m not convinced a blanket 15% is the best starting point on a budget this size. It can conceal poorly defined scope. Spend some effort narrowing the expensive unknowns first: inspect plumbing routes and isolation points, test suspicious moisture areas, establish what can actually be accessed, and identify any proposed penetrations. “No extension” does not automatically mean there will be no structural or fire-stopping implications inside the building.

 

[celine_keys]

Both approaches can work together: retain a contingency but attach each known risk to an action. Make a short pre-construction schedule covering surveys, opening-up, building approvals, contractor design questions and material orders. Then ask bidders to price the same sequence and state lead times. If one assumes the kitchen arrives before electrical work and another assumes the opposite, their totals will not be genuinely comparable.

 

[bakesAndView]

That helps. I’ll avoid treating contingency as a substitute for defining the scope. The next version will separate testing from electrical remedials, identify plumbing and moisture opening-up, and require an exclusions schedule from each bidder. I’ll also put building-management timing, access restrictions and material lead times into the programme before deciding whether 15% is justified or can be reduced.