Jared Clayton

My feedback

  1. 202 votes
    Sign in Sign in with: Procore Okta
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Jared Clayton supported this idea  · 
  2. 11 votes
    Sign in Sign in with: Procore Okta
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Jared Clayton supported this idea  · 
  3. 3 votes
    Sign in Sign in with: Procore Okta
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Jared Clayton supported this idea  · 
  4. 56 votes
    Sign in Sign in with: Procore Okta
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Jared Clayton supported this idea  · 
  5. 23 votes
    Sign in Sign in with: Procore Okta
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Jared Clayton commented  · 

    We would like to incorporate some permits in to inspections where the items that need to be selected can have more than one answer. ie. excavation permit - inspection elements would be: Dial before you dig -tick, visual inspection - tick, council plans - tick, locating device - not ticked, potholing not ticked. ASll of these elements could be 1 question with tick boxes as opposed to 6 individual questions.

    Jared Clayton supported this idea  · 
  6. 29 votes
    Sign in Sign in with: Procore Okta
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Hello,

    Thank you for your feedback! Required Fields is only temporary until the release of Default Project Stages in the new Construction Volume Experience, which will only require the fields for projects in Course of Construction, Post-Construction, or Completed stages. For more information, please see the following support articles:

    https://support.procore.com/product-releases/new-releases/admin-new-required-fields-for-project-information,

    https://support.procore.com/product-releases/new-releases/admin-default-project-stages

    Thank you for your patience and feedback!

    Jared Clayton supported this idea  · 
  7. 26 votes
    Sign in Sign in with: Procore Okta
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Jared Clayton supported this idea  · 
  8. 5 votes
    Sign in Sign in with: Procore Okta
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Jared Clayton supported this idea  · 
  9. 15 votes
    Sign in Sign in with: Procore Okta
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Jared Clayton supported this idea  · 
  10. 118 votes
    Sign in Sign in with: Procore Okta
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Jared Clayton supported this idea  · 
  11. 409 votes
    Sign in Sign in with: Procore Okta
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Jared Clayton supported this idea  · 
  12. 797 votes
    Sign in Sign in with: Procore Okta
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Jared Clayton supported this idea  · 
  13. 66 votes
    Sign in Sign in with: Procore Okta
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Jared Clayton supported this idea  · 
  14. 94 votes
    Sign in Sign in with: Procore Okta
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Jared Clayton commented  · 

    We also need the ability to part pay on pending/unapproved commitment variations where the work has been done and we are waiting on client approval.

    The Security of Payment Act is in place for this situation and if the subcontractor claims, we are not allowed to use the excuse of not approving to the Subcontractor because the Principal/client hasn’t approved the HCV as yet.

    There are quite a few pending variations on projects. PM’s have approved to be paid (part % claimed amounts) on a number of pending variations, but in order for me to process the s/c claim, I have to approve all of the commitment variations first, which is not ideal, because the full submitted figure may get knocked back. It is a bit hard – because we are talking about large $$ of structural concrete work having been completed and it is because they are under pressure from holding up the project works if it did not get completed.

    Jared Clayton supported this idea  · 
  15. 14 votes
    Sign in Sign in with: Procore Okta
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Jared Clayton supported this idea  · 
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Jared Clayton commented  · 

    We also need the ability to part pay on pending/unapproved commitment variations where the work has been done and we are waiting on client approval.

    The Security of Payment Act is in place for this situation and if the subcontractor claims, we are not allowed to use the excuse of not approving to the Subcontractor because the Principal/client hasn’t approved the HCV as yet.

    There are quite a few pending variations on some of our projects. PM’s have approved to be paid (part % claimed amounts) on a number of pending variations, but in order for me to process the s/c claim, I have to approve all of the commitment variations first, which is not ideal, because the full submitted figure may get knocked back. It is a bit hard – because we are talking about large $$ of structural concrete work having been completed and it is because they are under pressure from holding up the project works if it did not get completed.

  16. 196 votes
    Sign in Sign in with: Procore Okta
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Jared Clayton commented  · 

    We require a custom report of approved commitments that are NOT ERP synced, this would be on a schedule to be emailed a couple of days prior to payment runs so accounts payable do not have to chase project administrators to send to ERP.

    The project admin would see their projects with the commitments needed to be sent and tick them off making everyone happy.

    Jared Clayton supported this idea  · 
  17. 24 votes
    Sign in Sign in with: Procore Okta
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Jared Clayton supported this idea  · 
  18. 41 votes
    Sign in Sign in with: Procore Okta
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Jared Clayton supported this idea  · 
  19. 111 votes
    Sign in Sign in with: Procore Okta
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Jared Clayton supported this idea  · 
  20. 3 votes
    Sign in Sign in with: Procore Okta
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    Jared Clayton supported this idea  · 
← Previous 1 3

Feedback and Knowledge Base