case study
Furnival Street
Scroll Down
Client
LMB
Budget
£1,200,000
Timeline
2 month involvement
Description
An M&E subcontractor was involved in a contractual dispute with the main contractor over project delays. The subcontractor argued that their work had been consistently hindered by other trades, preventing them from proceeding as planned and ultimately disrupting the contract programme. In response, the main contractor presented a delay analysis, which the subcontractor contested. Senate Consulting was engaged to produce a prolongation report that would critically assess and respond to the main contractor's claims.
Challenge
One of the key challenges was that the available evidence such as site photographic reports, emails, and schedules-was scattered across multiple sources. Senate needed to meticulously analyse and extract relevant data to construct an accurate as-built programme and compare it against the main contractor's revised schedule.
Goal
Senate Consulting conducted an in-depth forensic analysis, which included:
- Mining historical project data, including photographic evidence, correspondence, and scheduling records, to establish an objective timeline.
- Developing a precise as-built programme to contrast with the main contractor's revised programme.
- Identifying inconsistencies in the main contractor's reported progress and highlighting unaccounted-for disruptions and showstoppers that impacted the subcontractor's work.
Outcome
Senate Consulting's prolongation report and as-built programme revealed that the main contractor had inaccurately reported progress, omitting critical changes from their narrative. This independent analysis provided the subcontractor with strong, evidence-based substantiation for their claim, ensuring that the true causes of delay were properly recognised, ultimately allowing the M&E contractor to reach an agreement with the main contractor.
