Keeping records that explain a construction claim
Useful records let another person follow the event, your obligations and your calculation. A large folder is only helpful when its contents can be understood.
by Jack Butler-Kettle · About 5 min readShare
Before you start
Collect the original agreement, correspondence, site records and financial records. Keep originals separate from the working set.
Keep original records and connect them to the facts they support. Distinguish what happened, what the contract requires and what the figures show. Record uncertainty and contrary evidence as carefully as favourable material.
Step-by-step guide
1. Preserve and index original records
Keep emails with attachments, dated drawing revisions, original photographs and exported project-system records. Retain metadata where possible.
Use working copies for highlighting and calculations. Do not silently edit originals or recreate old notes as if they were written contemporaneously.
If an explanation is written later, label its date and author. Distinguish recollection from a record made at the time.
2. Connect the issues, rights, events and figures
Use a chronology for events, a document index for sources, an issue list for disagreements and a calculation for amounts.
Give each event and document an identifier. A reader should be able to move from a sentence or figure to the record behind it.
For a starting set of editable registers and correspondence templates, the free Claim prevention pack includes a guide to using them on a project. Adapt the records to your contract and keep the underlying evidence.
The SCL Protocol emphasises transparent information and methodology for delay and disruption. The organising approach here is a practical suggestion, not a prescribed legal format.
3. Test the evidence and identify gaps
An invoice may support expenditure without proving who caused it. A photograph may show a condition without establishing its date or contractual responsibility.
For each disputed issue, list supporting evidence, contrary evidence and missing information. Check quantities and dates against more than one source where available.
For calculations, show units, rates, quantities, assumptions and deductions. Link totals back to source records and check for duplicated costs.
A Claim viability review tests these connections and identifies evidence gaps before more work is committed to preparing a claim. For help maintaining records as issues develop, Project Partner Retainer provides ongoing support within an agreed monthly scope.
4. Prepare a usable evidence pack
Before you finish: Check that each material assertion can be traced to a source and that contrary evidence, estimates and missing records remain visible.
Worked example
The facts
A flooring subcontractor has 200 photos and a £4,800 claim concerning repeated return visits.
What happens
They group photos by date and area and check them against site diaries.
They connect each return visit to the instruction or access record and the associated labour entry.
They remove a duplicated labour entry and clearly label a visit whose reason remains uncertain.
What this shows
The pack becomes easier to test. Better organisation does not turn an unsupported item into an established entitlement.
Claim evidence pack
Replace the example with contemporaneous records. Preserve original files and show both supporting and contrary evidence; distinguish assumptions from observed facts.
Free blank template for your own project. The completed example is shown below. No email address required.
View the completed example
Completed fictional example
Westhaven refurbishment · 14 October 2026 · Version 1.0
Issue and chronology
Scroll across if needed to read the whole record. A dash means no value has been entered.
| Date / time | Event | Evidence | Effect / limitation |
|---|---|---|---|
| 7 Oct 08:00–12:00 | Level 1 access restricted; four installers planned | D-07; AL-07; TS-07 | 16 planned hours; 8 redeployed elsewhere |
| 8 Oct 08:00–12:00 | Access restricted until 10:00, then reopened | D-08; AL-08; TS-08 | 16 planned hours; 8 productive after reopening |
| 14 Oct | Claim reviewed against logs and timesheets | Review CR-14 | 32 claimed hours reduced to 16 supported idle hours |
Evidence index
Scroll across if needed to read the whole record. A dash means no value has been entered.
| Reference | Record / author | Original file location | What it shows | Limit / check |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| D-07 | Site diary, A. Reed, 7 Oct | /project/evidence/D-07.pdf | Access closed 08:00–12:00; two people redeployed | Read with signed timesheets |
| D-08 | Site diary, A. Reed, 8 Oct | /project/evidence/D-08.pdf | Access reopened 10:00 | Contradicts four-hour stoppage for all staff |
| TS-07/08 | Approved labour allocations | /project/evidence/TS-07-08.xlsx | Named hours by work area | Check no duplicate recovery |
| AL-07/08 | Contractor access logs | /project/evidence/AL-07-08.pdf | Access closure and reopening times | Does not establish contractual liability |
Supported labour calculation
Scroll across if needed to read the whole record. A dash means no value has been entered.
| Day | Initially claimed hours | Redeployed / productive hours | Supported idle hours | Verified cost / hour (£) | Supported cost (£) | Basis |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7 Oct | 16 | 8 | 8 | £30.00 | £240.00 | 4 people × 4 h; 2 people × 4 h redeployed |
| 8 Oct | 16 | 8 | 8 | £30.00 | £240.00 | 4 people × 4 h; 4 people × 2 h productive |
All evidence references are fictional teaching exhibits. The example supports £480 of recorded idle labour cost; contractual entitlement and completion delay still require separate assessment.
Sources
- Delay and Disruption Protocol, 2nd edition, February 2017. Society of Construction Law.