First Impressions of a Contractor’s Claim

I have just spent half a day reviewing a claim from a contractor on a project where I have been appointed to manage the claims and produce assessments on behalf of the engineer. My impressions after this first review are that the contractor may very well have a valid case for an extension of time but to a lesser extent than that claimed. However, on the basis of his claim, he does not deserve anything because his claim is inadequately expressed. His main failures are that he has failed to link the cause with the effect that he is claiming, the basis of his delay analysis is based on something that, if he had taken the trouble to attempt to substantiate his assertions, he would have himself realised was simply not true.

Apart from the fact that the contractor has not established entitlement to an award, his claim is just annoying to read and to deal with – something that is hardly going to elicit much sympathy from a reviewer. It is badly organised, the narrative says a lot, but doesn’t mean much, large numbers of records have been quoted from, but not once does the contractor draw any conclusions from the records and finally, the few substantiating documents that the contractor has included are very difficult to locate in the claim submission document.

I have a feeling, the contractor is going to receive the award that he deserves based on his submission. This is not however, going to be much.

If you need help writing a claim contact us today.