Construction disputes, particularly those revolving around schedule delays, are the most frequent issues encountered in construction contracts. In addition to the competition in general contracting sector, the precise pricing and execution of work have become paramount.
Establishing and substantiating a delay claim in construction can be a complex endeavor. Therefore, possessing a comprehensive grasp of the essential components necessary to support a delay claim can provide a significant advantage. Simultaneously, understanding the intricacies of delay claims is valuable for construction firms seeking to defend against unfounded claims.
When construction projects experience delays or disruptions, various parties involved can incur additional job-site costs that accumulate over time. In the event of a dispute regarding the responsibility for these extra costs, the involved parties often engage in schedule delay analysis to substantiate their claims for damages. Schedule Delay Analysis is a meticulous process where experts employ Critical Path Method (CPM) techniques. These techniques in conjunction with a forensic examination of project documentation and relevant data help evaluate and allocate the impacts of the delays.
The outcome of this analysis typically quantifies the amount of time for which a party may seek compensation for damages. Over the past four decades, the use of retrospective CPM scheduling techniques in contract disputes has become increasingly prevalent. This trend can be attributed, in part, to the courts’ growing recognition and reliance on CPM methods. Also to their increased dependence on experts to elucidate these techniques.
Expert assessments of schedules and time-related claims entail a comparison between planned and actual schedule performance.
Critical Aspects of a Claim
1. Planned Construction Process: This involves evaluating the original project plan in terms of activities, work sequences, activity durations, labor requirements, and capital expenditures.
2. Actual Activity Duration and Sequences: Experts scrutinize the real-time duration and sequences of activities as they occurred on the construction site.
3. Variances Between Planned and Actual Performance: Experts identify disparities between the originally planned work and the actual work performed.
4. Causes of Variances: Determining the factors that contributed to the variances in work sequences, activity durations, labor, and resources.
5. Effects of Variances: Analyzing the impact of these variances on the incurred costs of the involved party or parties.
Engel & Engel’s approach to handling such engagements relies on a highly integrated team comprising forensic accountants, financial and economic specialists, and valuation experts. Our damage models, expert reports, and testimony are designed to enhance the prospects of achieving a favorable outcome in each engagement. We participate in a diverse range of engagements across the legal landscape and remain accessible throughout all phases of litigation.
In conclusion, navigating construction delay claims and conducting economic damage analysis in this complex arena necessitates a comprehensive understanding of the intricacies involved. Whether you are pursuing a delay claim or defending against one, having experienced experts on your side can make all the difference in the successful resolution of construction disputes.