The Cycle of A Poorly Written Construction Claim
It is no secret that poorly written construction claims are one of the main causes of time-consuming and costly disputes.
However, the dispute process often finds in favour of the claimant.
Why is this?
Let’s look at a typical claim and dispute cycle:
- The claimant submits a construction claim that does not include: Cause, Effect, Entitlement and Substantiation (CEES).
- The respondent rejects the claim because it does not prove the claimant’s case.
- Discussions and negotiations take place, but the parties maintain their positions.
- The claimant is convinced that the claim is a fair one and elevates the matter to a dispute.
- At this point, the claimant realises that the claim needs improvement. They consult an expert.
- The expert confirms that the claim is poorly written. They advise that if it has any chance of persuading adjudicators or arbitrators in favour of the claimant, it needs improvement.
- The claimant engages the expert to improve or rewrite the claim.
- The adjudicators or arbitrators decide in favour of the claimant.
- The respondent agrees with the adjudicators or arbitrators, and would have made an award if the claim was properly presented in the first place.
So here’s a question…
Wouldn’t it have been better for the claimant to submit a well written construction claim in the first place, saving all parties time and money?
Need to improve your claims writing skills? Check out our e-courses today.
Looking to upskill your project teams? Book a call with us to discuss how we could support you.