Commercial risk review for debris screen and channel works

We supported a civil engineering contractor reviewing the commercial position on a group of debris screen and channel schemes. Two principal contracts had a combined original value of approximately £1.1 million. Changes, extended construction periods and difficult working conditions required the team to distinguish agreed compensation events from the delay and cost issues that still needed to be addressed.

Background

The works included new screens, channel construction, drainage and access improvements around existing watercourses and assets. Delivery involved constrained working areas and the management of water flows, with some activities dependent on design changes or remedial decisions.

The original completion periods had been extended through compensation events, but those agreements did not explain the whole forecast overrun. The client needed to understand the remaining exposure and where further records or contractual action were required.

Our approach

We reviewed the contract particulars and the commercial position for each package. The review set out the original price, planned duration, delay-damages provision and applicable pricing arrangements, alongside compensation-event values and time adjustments.

Crucially, it separated the additional time already accepted from the current forecast completion date. This showed the further period that still needed explanation. The same approach was applied to the change account, distinguishing quoted amounts from accepted amounts rather than treating every quotation as recovered value.

We raised specific questions about the basis of the pricing and the protection of entitlement. These included the framework people rates, equipment adjustments, early warnings and the reasons for differences between submitted and accepted time or money. The resulting review directed attention to the records needed to support the commercial position.

Discussions with the project team added the operational context. On one channel, a change from the originally envisaged construction method was reported to have extended an activity allowed about a week into roughly two months. That required a closer explanation of the changed work and its effect on the programme.

On another site, damage to an existing structure and restrictions caused by water flows had interrupted the sequence. The review recorded the competing explanations and identified the need for supporting meeting records and correspondence. It kept the factual investigation separate from any conclusion about liability.

Project updates were considered alongside the contract reviews to distinguish completed work, remaining minor items and suspended activities. This helped avoid treating a combined contract as though all its sites had the same completion position.

Outcome

The review gave the client a structured account of the remaining commercial questions: what had already been agreed, what still affected completion, and what evidence was needed to progress the outstanding issues.

The immediate value was clarity for the delivery and commercial teams. They could focus follow-up work on specific event, pricing and programme gaps, with a clearer view of the position across the separate sites.