What do you need from us to start?

The current drawing set with revision numbers, the specification if one exists, and the model if there is one. If part of that is missing we can still measure, with the gaps recorded as assumptions on the face of the schedule. What we will not do is silently fill a gap and let it read as a measured quantity.

Which standard do you measure to?

NRM2 for bills and pricing schedules, NRM1 elemental structure where the output feeds a cost plan . If a project is running to a different rule set, we will follow it and say so in the basis of measurement. What matters is that one rule applies throughout and that everyone pricing knows which one.

Our model is not very good. Is it still worth using?

Often yes, for the parts that are modelled properly. The judgement is which elements to trust and which to measure conventionally, and that judgement is made explicitly rather than assumed. A model that is only reliable for the frame and the envelope is still saving you time on the frame and the envelope.

Can you check quantities in a claim or final account?

Yes, and it is a frequent instruction. Remeasurement of contested work, verification of a contractor's quantities, and testing whether claimed items were already inside the original scope. That work sits alongside final accounts and disputes .

Loss and Expense Claims | Disruption Costs

01
Entitlement under the contract: which provisions allow recovery, for which matters, and what has to have been done to keep the right alive.
02
Prolongation separated from disruption: two different claims with two different proofs, routinely presented as one and routinely rejected for it.
03
Costs traced to records: preliminaries, resources and expenditure evidenced from what the project actually recorded.
04
Causation, honestly assessed: where the chain from event to cost cannot be shown, you are told, before the claim is built on it.

Rarely because the contractor did not lose money. Usually because the claim does not show which event caused which cost.

A total cost claim, meaning everything spent less everything recovered, invites the answer that some of the overspend was the claimant's own, and that answer is usually correct in part.

Disruption is harder to prove than prolongation because it is about productivity rather than duration, and productivity leaves fewer traces unless somebody was recording it.

Preliminaries claimed as a monthly rate for the extended period assume the resources stayed on site at the same level, which is often untrue and always checkable.

01

Contractual provisions

The matters that give rise to recovery, the notice and application requirements, and how the contract says the amount is ascertained.

02

Prolongation

The time-related costs of the extended period, by resource, for the period actually affected rather than for the whole overrun.

03

Disruption

The loss of productivity, measured against what the records support, stated as a method rather than a figure pulled from the difference.

04

Preliminaries and site expenditure

What was on site, for how long and at what cost, taken from the records rather than from the allowances in the tender.

05

Causation and entitlement

The link from each matter to each head of cost, which is the part that decides whether the claim survives assessment.

06

Claim schedules

The amounts set out line by line, with their basis shown, so they can be checked rather than accepted or refused as a lump.

Prolongation and disruption are kept apart because they are proved differently. Mixing them produces a global claim, and global claims usually fail, not because the loss was imaginary but because the claimant has asked the other side to accept the whole thing or nothing.

This is commercial and contractual assessment, not legal advice. Where entitlement turns on legal interpretation, or where the claim is heading for a tribunal, you need a construction solicitor alongside this work, and we will say so.

All claims and dispute services

Can we claim loss and expense without an extension of time?

Sometimes. They run under separate provisions, and a matter can give rise to cost without affecting the completion date. The reverse is also true: an extension of time does not automatically carry money with it.

Our records are thin. Is it worth pursuing?

Possibly, and the honest answer comes from looking at them. Thin records limit what can be proved, but they rarely leave nothing. What they do rule out is a claim presented as a single global figure.

Is head office overhead recoverable?

It depends on the contract and on what can be shown. It is one of the most frequently claimed and most frequently reduced heads, and the basis of calculation matters more than the formula chosen.