Contracts & ExecutionQuestion 888 of 1632

An owner and contractor dispute whether a certain task was included in the fixed price. The contract's clear, integrated scope of work does not list that task. Under general interpretation principles, the task is most likely:

a.Included at no charge, since a fixed price covers the finished result
b.Barred by the Statute of Frauds, because the scope was integrated
c.Extra work, compensable if the owner requests it under a change order
d.A breach by the contractor for failing to price the task

Explanation

A clear, integrated scope of work sets the boundary of the fixed price; a task outside it is an extra, and it becomes compensable when the owner orders it. On home improvement work that order must be a change order in writing, signed before the changed work begins (B&P §7159(d)), and §7159(e)(3) requires the contract to warn the buyer that extras without such an order are unenforceable against him. (a) is the owner's version of the argument, and it proves too much: if a fixed price covered anything anyone later wanted, the scope clause would mean nothing. (b) misapplies the Statute of Frauds, which decides which agreements need a writing at all (Civil Code §1624), not whether an integrated contract can be added to. (d) blames the contractor for not pricing work nobody asked him to price.

Law Reference: Bus. & Prof. Code §7159(d), §7159(e)(3); cf. Civil Code §1624

This topic, taught in full in the CSLB Law & Business guide. CSLB Law & Business — Complete Study Guide (2026) — PDF + EPUB, $24.99 · 14-day refund →

Practice all 1632 questions free — no signup required.

Own the complete CSLB Law & Business guide — PDF + EPUB, $24.99 →

Related questions on this topic

Last reviewed: · editorial process

PrepPass team · Verified against California CSLB Contractor License Law & Business Exam · How we review
Reviewed by Abraham Chen — Licensed California General Contractor (CSLB License #1101856 — verify)
Report