Construction Claims are a natural part of complex projects involving multiple contracts, technical requirements and commercial obligations. A project may move away from its original plan as work progresses, creating questions about responsibility, entitlement and the financial effect of unexpected developments.
Late drawings, approvals, decisions or access to work areas can prevent planned activities from starting or continuing, making them common claims in construction projects. The assessment should identify the information or access required, the contractual date for its release, the actual date received and the specific activity affected.
For example, if structural drawings are issued after reinforcement work was scheduled to begin, the contractor may need to keep labour and equipment available, resequence the work or move resources to another area. The analysis should compare the planned programme with actual progress and distinguish a genuine delay from a situation where alternative work could reasonably have continued. Correspondence, drawing registers, request-for-information logs, progress records and resource reports can help establish the impact.
Programme records should identify logic links, critical activities, actual start and finish dates, remaining durations, float and approved changes. Missing logic or retrospective adjustments should be clearly explained, as they may reduce the reliability of the analysis.
Other useful evidence includes drawing registers, RFI logs, access records, approval trackers, photographs, inspection reports, labour returns and procurement schedules. These records help connect the delay to a specific event and demonstrate its effect on project progress.
If the Construction Claims submission includes additional payment, detailed cost records are also necessary. These may cover site management, temporary facilities, equipment hire, insurance and other prolongation costs. The amount requested should reflect the actual recoverable loss and remain traceable to supporting documents.
An extension of time, commonly called an EOT, adjusts the contractual completion date when a qualifying event delays completion. The contract may recognise employer-caused delay, exceptional weather, authority actions or other specified events.
An EOT submission should normally include:
An extension of time does not automatically create a right to additional payment. Time entitlement and cost entitlement must be assessed separately under the contract.
Force majeure provisions may apply to events outside the parties’ control that could not reasonably have been prevented or overcome. Depending on the contract, these events may include natural disasters, government restrictions, war, widespread industrial action or other exceptional circumstances.
The claimant generally needs to demonstrate that the event was covered by the clause, directly affected performance and could not reasonably be mitigated. Notice requirements are often strict. The parties should also review whether the clause grants time relief, cost compensation or only a right to suspend or terminate the contract.
Work may be suspended by an employer’s instruction, a contractual right or circumstances that make continued performance unsafe or impossible. In such cases a Construction Claims Consultant can assess entitlement for idle resources, protection and storage costs, remobilisation expenses or programme delays.
Project records should identify the suspended areas, the start date, duration, affected resources and measures taken to protect completed work. If the suspension continues for an extended period, the contract may provide a right to recover additional costs or terminate the agreement under specified conditions. A clear record of the suspension helps establish entitlement and quantify its effect accurately.
Disruption occurs when an event interferes with the planned method, sequence or productivity of construction work, even when the project reaches completion on time. Repeated design changes, restricted access, overcrowded work areas, out-of-sequence instructions and poor coordination between subcontractors may increase labour hours, equipment use and supervision requirements. When these issues cause a measurable loss of productivity or additional cost, they become common claims in construction projects.
The assessment should compare planned productivity with actual performance. It should identify the affected activities, work areas, dates and resources, while explaining how the disruptive event caused the reduction in efficiency. Daily reports, labour records, progress updates, site photographs and project correspondence can help establish this connection.
Acceleration involves increasing the rate of progress to achieve an earlier completion date or recover lost time. Additional shifts, overtime, extra crews, equipment, prefabrication and revised construction methods may be required. The contractual basis should be clarified before these measures are implemented, whether acceleration results from an instruction, an agreement or an attempt to avoid further delay.
A Construction Project Claims assessment should separate additional costs from ordinary project expenditure. Overtime, supervision, plant hire, transport, temporary facilities and extended overheads should be supported by reliable records showing the target date, measures adopted, resources used and actual results.
A change order modifies the work originally described in the contract. It may add or remove activities, alter quantities, revise specifications or require a different construction method. These changes may give rise to a claim when they affect the agreed price, completion date or contractual obligations. The change should be connected to a written instruction, approved drawing, request for quotation, revised specification or another authorised communication. Informal discussions should be confirmed in writing before they are treated as approval.
A complete submission should compare the original requirement with the revised scope and explain the effect on price and time. It should also identify changes to procurement, sequencing, site access, testing or specialist labour. The valuation method depends on the contract. Existing rates may apply to similar work, while new activities may require a detailed assessment of labour, materials, equipment, subcontractor quotations, overheads and profit. These valuation issues are common claims in construction projects when a revised scope changes the cost or timing of the work.
The contractor should maintain a variation register containing the instruction date, description, approval status, valuation and time impact. Marked-up drawings, measurement sheets, delivery records and photographs can verify the work completed. If approval is delayed, timely notice should be issued with details of the likely consequences. Without accurate records, disputes may arise over both entitlement and the value of the variation.
Rock, groundwater, contaminated soil, buried obstructions and unstable ground are common examples of differing site conditions and may require additional excavation, treatment, support or disposal. These issues may give rise to a claim when the conditions encountered differ materially from the information available at the tender stage.
The assessment should describe the condition, identify the relevant contract or site information and explain how the actual circumstances affected the planned work. Daily records, survey data, laboratory results, inspection reports and photographs should be collected before the condition is covered, removed or altered. These records can help demonstrate the physical difference and support the assessment of additional time and costs.
The comparison should be made against the contract documents, site investigation reports, employer-provided data and any stated risk allocation. A condition is not automatically a compensable event merely because it was inconvenient or more costly than expected.
The contract may require the contractor to inspect the site and notify the employer immediately after discovering the condition. Failure to follow that process can affect the claim.
The cost assessment for differing site conditions, one of the common claims in construction projects may include additional excavation, pumping, testing, disposal, imported fill, temporary support, specialist equipment and extended supervision. Each item should be supported by measurements, invoices, delivery records or resource reports that demonstrate the actual expenditure.
The analysis should exclude costs caused by poor execution, inadequate planning or inefficient resource management. This distinction is essential when the contract assigns specific ground risks to the contractor. A clear comparison between the original site assumptions and the conditions encountered can help establish which costs resulted from an unexpected physical condition and which arose from the contractor’s own performance.
Design-related issues occur when drawings, specifications or calculations contain errors, omissions or inconsistencies that affect construction. These problems may lead to rework, procurement changes, delays, material waste and additional supervision. When the resulting impact affects contractual cost, time or responsibility a Construction Claims Consultant can assess the contractual implications.
Incomplete design information can prevent procurement or make it impossible to complete an activity in accordance with the contract. The assessment should identify the missing detail, the date it was required, the affected work and the date the information was finally provided. A drawing register and request-for-information log can demonstrate how the issue developed from the initial query to the final design response.
An incorrect dimension, conflicting detail or unsuitable specification may require completed work to be removed and rebuilt. The cost of the original work should be separated from the cost of correction, while the programme analysis should show whether the error affected critical activities. Photographs, inspection records, revised drawings, material waste records and subcontractor statements can support the assessment.
Responsibility for Construction Project Claims depends on the contract’s design obligations. The employer, designer, contractor or specialist subcontractor may carry different risks for design development, checking and coordination. The review should consider design responsibility matrices, approval procedures, delegated design provisions and construction instructions rather than assigning responsibility solely to the party that discovered the error.
Payment disputes may involve unpaid applications, disputed measurements, withheld retention, delayed certification or deductions that lack contractual support. A payment assessment should identify the application date, certified amount, payments received, outstanding balance and contractual deadline. Measured quantities, payment certificates, invoices, approved variations and correspondence can support the requested amount.
The claimant should distinguish between a certified amount that remains unpaid and an amount still under review. These situations may involve different notice requirements and contractual remedies. Clear records can also help identify whether the dispute concerns valuation, certification or late payment.
Termination may follow persistent non-payment, abandonment, failure to proceed, insolvency or another serious breach. The contract commonly requires formal notice, a period to remedy the breach and compliance with a specific procedure. Before taking action, the party should review its termination rights and preserve evidence of the breach. Failure to follow the required process may result in allegations of wrongful termination.
Following termination, the assessment may include unpaid work, demobilisation, purchased materials, subcontractor liabilities, equipment removal and reasonable completion costs. The calculation should deduct payments already received, avoided expenditure and any recoverable value of materials or equipment. Unsupported estimates may weaken the financial position, even where the underlying breach is established.
The evidence should define the defect and the requirement it fails to satisfy. Inspection reports, test results, non-conformance notices, photographs and manufacturer information can establish the technical position.
The parties should also identify whether the defect is isolated or repeated and whether it affects safety, performance, durability or appearance.
Defective work can give rise to common claims in construction projects. A completed element may appear defective because it was installed incorrectly, or because the design itself was unsuitable. The investigation should review the approved design, installation method, inspection records and instructions received.
This distinction affects who must pay for correction and whether the remedy is repair, redesign or replacement.
The remedy should be proportionate to the defect and consistent with the contract. Recoverable costs may include investigation, access, removal, replacement, testing, disposal and reinstatement.
The contractor should receive clear instructions before carrying out disputed remedial work where practical. Independent technical reports can help resolve disagreements about the appropriate remedy.
OPM Group provides Construction Project Claims support and related professional services for clients across Europe and the United States.
The initial review focuses on the contract, the event in dispute, notices issued, current project status and available records. This helps determine whether the issue concerns time, cost, responsibility or a combination of these matters.
Each claim requires a strategy suited to its facts and contract. opm group can help determine whether the matter is best addressed through a variation submission, EOT request, payment claim, disruption analysis, negotiation or formal dispute process.
opm group provides structured support for construction disputes, including entitlement review, delay analysis, disruption assessment, variation valuation and preparation of supporting project documents.
At OPM Group, we deliver comprehensive PMC tailored to ensure the successful execution of complex industrial and infrastructure projects.Our expertise spans from the bidding stage through to project completion, providing robust support at every phase.
Stay updated with the latest security trends offers by subscribing to our newsletter.
Copyright © 2025 All Rights Reserved.
