Substantiating a $912k delay and storage claim for a façade subcontractor

Our client was in dispute with its main contractor regarding entitlement to additional time and prolongation costs. The works were completed 289 days late, with only 175 days awarded, leaving a significant balance of time and costs unresolved. The client had also incurred substantial losses, including unpaid extended material storage costs.

We undertook an initial review and found that, whilst part of the claim had been agreed, the remaining entitlement was not clearly demonstrated or fully substantiated. The contractor had also issued a substantial counterclaim alleging delay and disruption.

We worked with our client to strengthen its position, ensuring its claim for time and money was contract-compliant, evidence-led, and directly addressed the contractor’s allegations. The client’s objective was to negotiate the final account, but with a submission robust enough for formal dispute resolution if required.

Our approach

We structured the work into three key streams:

• Entitlement and delay
• Quantum
• Rebuttal of counterclaims

We appointed an independent delay expert to undertake a detailed forensic delay analysis. We then ensured the expert findings were clearly aligned with the time already awarded and the remaining entitlement, establishing that the contractor was responsible for the majority of the delay.

On quantum, we prepared the claim using contemporaneous records, clearly linking resources, time periods, and costs. We also developed a fully substantiated claim for extended material storage costs.

In parallel, we reviewed the contractor’s counterclaim and identified gaps in causation and evidential support, strengthening our client’s defensive position.

The outcome

We produced a fully substantiated claim that established:

• Entitlement to a further 107-day extension of time.
• A claim of c. $912k in delay damages and storage costs.
• A robust defence to the contractor’s $1.4m counterclaim, with only a minimal amount accepted.

This positioned our client to negotiate the final account from a position of strength, supported by a clear and credible case on entitlement and quantum.