# Choosing a Fit-Out Contractor: What to Ask and What to Check

> Fit-out bids are rarely comparable as received, because each prices a slightly different scope. Useful evaluation means normalising the scope first, then judging programme evidence, the named site team, financial capacity and references — with price considered last, once you are certain the numbers describe the same work.

## Why this is harder than it looks

You are buying something that does not exist yet, from people whose past work
you can see but whose performance on *your* project depends on individuals,
workload and circumstances you cannot see.

Price is the easiest thing to compare and the least informative, because the
numbers in front of you almost certainly describe different scopes of work.

## Step one: make the bids comparable

Before looking at any total, check what each one includes:

| Item | Frequently excluded |
| --- | --- |
| Services alterations | HVAC rebalancing, duct modification |
| Fire systems | Sprinkler and detector relocation for the new layout |
| Ceiling | Whether existing is retained, adapted or replaced |
| Flooring preparation | Screed and levelling, which vary enormously by finish |
| Electrical | Containment only, or final circuits and devices |
| IT and AV | Containment only, or the systems themselves |
| Furniture | Almost always separate |
| Statutory approvals | Whose cost and whose effort |
| Making good and protection | Common areas, lift lobbies, adjacent tenants |
| Documentation | As-builts, O&M manuals, commissioning records |

Issue a scope schedule and require every bidder to price the same list, marking
exclusions explicitly. A comparison built on anything less is guesswork.

Where the contract will be item-rate, agree the method of measurement — commonly
referenced to **IS 1200** — so quantities are not argued later.

## Step two: judge capability, not marketing

Five checks separate capability from marketing. For each, ask for something
specific and judge the answer.

| Check | What to ask for | Why it matters |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Named site team | Who runs the site, what else they run concurrently — and meet them | Affects outcome more than the firm's brochure |
| Programme logic | What governs the date on your project | A capable contractor names long-lead items, the information needed from you and by when, and the services sequence; a weaker one gives a duration |
| Services capability | How they coordinate MEP, in-house or subcontracted, and a coordinated services drawing from a recent project | Most fit-out problems are services problems |
| Commissioning approach | What commissioning records you will receive | A vague answer means comfort complaints later |
| Financial standing | Audited accounts, current workload, how subcontractors are paid | A firm stretched thin will slow down or press for advances |

## Step three: check references properly

Speak to clients whose projects completed **at least a year ago**. Ask:

- Did defects get fixed promptly during the liability period?
- Did the as-builts and O&M documentation actually arrive, and were they usable?
- Were the commissioning records complete, with measured values?
- Did anything appear in the first monsoon, or the first peak summer?
- Were variations priced fairly, or did the number climb after signature?
- Would you appoint them again, for the same kind of project?

The last question is worth more than a testimonial.

## Warning signs

- **A total noticeably below the others.** Usually scope, occasionally
  desperation. Both are risks.
- **Reluctance to name the site manager.** Or naming one who is clearly
  overcommitted.
- **A programme with dates but no logic.** Nothing about long-lead items or
  information requirements.
- **No questions asked about your brief.** A contractor who does not probe the
  brief has not thought about how to build it.
- **Vagueness about commissioning and documentation.** These are the deliverables
  clients most often find missing.
- **Pressure to sign quickly.** Rarely in your interest.

## What to fix in the contract, not afterwards

- The scope, itemised, with exclusions stated
- Completion criteria — what must be finished, tested and handed over
- Documentation deliverables and their format
- How variations are priced, and against what rates
- The defects liability period, and whether it spans the relevant season
- Retention percentages and release points
- Sectional completion, if the floor is handed over in phases

Administrative provisions covering contracts and responsibilities sit within
**NBC 2016, Part 2**, and the contractual terms themselves should be settled with
legal advice.

## A note on honesty

The firms worth working with will tell you what they cannot answer without
seeing your floor plan, your services capacity and your lease. A contractor who
gives a confident rate and duration on a phone call, before seeing anything, is
not being helpful — they are giving you a number that will change.

## Standards referenced

Administrative provisions covering contracts and responsibilities in
**NBC 2016, Part 2**; method of measurement for building works in **IS 1200**.
Contract structure, terms and risk allocation for a specific project should be
settled with legal advice.

## Frequently asked questions

### Why is the cheapest bid usually not the cheapest project?

Because bids differ in what they include. One excludes services alterations, another excludes fire system modifications, a third assumes the existing ceiling is retained. The lowest number frequently belongs to the narrowest scope, and the gaps return later as variations priced without competitive pressure. Normalise the scope before comparing anything.

### What is the most revealing question to ask?

Ask who will actually run the site, by name, and what else they are running at the same time. Fit-out quality is largely determined by the site manager's attention, and a firm's capability means little if the individual assigned to you is stretched across three projects. Ask to meet them before appointment, not after.

### How should references be checked?

Speak to clients whose projects finished at least a year ago, not recent handovers. The questions worth asking are about what happened after: did defects get fixed promptly, did the documentation arrive, were the commissioning records complete, and did anything appear in the first monsoon or the first summer. A glowing reference from handover week says very little.

### What should the programme submission show?

Not a bar chart with dates, but the logic — which activities are on the critical path, what the long-lead items are and when they must be ordered, when design information is needed from you, and what the services sequence above the ceiling is. A contractor who can articulate what governs the date understands the job; one who offers a duration does not.

### How do we check financial capacity?

A fit-out involves the contractor carrying cost ahead of payment, and a firm stretched thin will slow down or press for advances. Audited accounts, existing workload, and how they propose to pay their own subcontractors are all legitimate questions. A contractor whose cash position fails mid-project becomes your problem, whatever the contract says.

### Should design and build be with the same firm?

It depends on how settled your brief is and whether you have independent oversight. A single contract gives one point of accountability and a faster programme, but removes the independent check on design and quality — so clients using it well appoint their own project manager. If your requirements are detailed and you have time, separate appointments give more control.

## Sources

- [NBC 2016, Part 2](https://www.bis.gov.in/standards/national-building-code/?lang=en) — Administration — contracts and responsibilities
- [IS 1200](https://standards.bis.gov.in/website/published-standards/department-wise) — Method of measurement of building and civil engineering works

---

Source: https://hagerstone.com/guides/choosing-a-fit-out-contractor