Skip to content
Quantsurv
Get in touch

Hunt your own double counting

The same cost claimed twice, under two different heads of claim, is the commonest way a claim gets taken apart. Check each head against the others before your main contractor does, and state plainly what each one covers.

Updated: . By Jack Butler-Kettle, Construction Claims Consultant.

Why it matters

Claims are built in separate parts, called heads of claim, often by different people. Each head is right on its own. Put them together and the same cost can appear twice. The site manager's salary sits in prolongation, the cost of the extra time on site. The disruption claim has him supervising the affected gang in the same weeks. The excavator is in the variation rates and claimed as standing plant too. Your main contractor's surveyor reads across the heads to find exactly this. One proven double count lets them argue the whole claim was put together carelessly. Saying openly what each head covers, before they look, takes that argument away.

How to do it

  1. List every resource that appears in more than one head: named staff, plant, your own subcontractors' costs and overheads.
  2. Check the weeks and how the cost is charged in every head each one appears in.
  3. Take the cost out of one head wherever it sits in two for the same weeks, and note where it has gone.
  4. Write a short note saying what each head covers and leaves out, and put it in front of the build-ups.
  5. Get someone outside the team to run the same check before the claim goes in.

Example

Illustrative example. The scenario and figures are invented.

The facts

A subcontractor's claim has three heads: variations at £320,000, prolongation at £95,000 and disruption at £140,000. Before it goes in, the surveyor checks across the heads and finds a site foreman and a crane in more than one.

What happens

  1. The foreman is in the prolongation costs for 14 weeks and in the disruption labour for 8 of the same weeks. The disruption entry, worth £9,600, is removed.
  2. The crane is included in the variation rates, and also in prolongation as standing plant for 6 weeks. £7,200 is removed from prolongation.
  3. A note is added saying supervision and plant are recovered in prolongation only, and the variation rates cover labour and materials only.

The outcome

The claim goes in at £538,200 instead of £555,000. The response clearly looks for costs counted twice, finds none, and has to deal with the build-ups instead.

To have this done for you, see our Delay & Disruption Claim service.