Second opinion on ZAR 1,738,000 renovation budget for 170 m² Johannesburg warehouse

A

AishaSlate

Homeowner
Established
The ZAR 1,738,000 total may be reasonable for 170 m², but the electrical allowance worries me. One contractor may have priced only testing while the other expects to replace defective wiring or upgrade the supply.

The proposed work includes new kitchen and bathroom areas, floors, decorating and some energy-efficiency improvements, without adding to the structure. Before comparing the two bids, should I ask for separate allowances for opening up, plumbing access, damp repairs, electrical remedial work and making good? I would also like to know what contingency is sensible before the warehouse has been fully inspected, and whether permit or approval timing should sit in the contractor’s programme.
 
The price difference may be sitting in exclusions rather than rates. Ask both contractors to break out demolition, waste removal, electrical testing versus repairs, plumbing routes, surface preparation and making good after services. I would carry a meaningful contingency—perhaps around 15%—until those items are opened up and inspected. Also ask whether their programme assumes materials are immediately available.
 
That is useful. I can see that “electrical checks” is too vague if one contractor means inspection only and the other has allowed for corrective work. Would you do selective opening-up before agreeing a fixed price, particularly around the bathrooms and any damp-looking wall or floor areas, or keep that work inside the main contract?
 
I’d do targeted opening-up first where it can answer an expensive question: plumbing access, concealed moisture and the condition of existing services. Photograph and record what is exposed, then have both contractors revise against the same information.

For sequencing, settle moisture and service routes before flooring or paint. Otherwise the apparent saving from starting finishes early can disappear when completed areas have to be disturbed again.
 
I’m not convinced a blanket 15% solves this. If the quotes still describe scope differently, even a large contingency can be consumed by predictable omissions. First create one comparison sheet showing inclusions, exclusions, quantities, provisional items and who carries disposal or access costs. Then set contingency according to what remains genuinely unknown, with structural concerns separated from ordinary finish changes.
 
Also test the programme, not just the total. Ask each contractor which items have material lead times, what work can proceed while those are outstanding, and whether any approvals affect the planned start or sequence in Johannesburg. A simple order could be investigations, any required design or approval work, service repairs, wet areas, energy upgrades, then flooring and decoration. Get the payment schedule tied to clearly described completed stages rather than dates alone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top