- Claims Consulting
- Construction Claims Management
- Environmental Claims Management
- Schedule Delay Analysis
- Damage Calculations / Analysis
Schedule Delay Analysis
Delays in completing construction or environmental restoration projects are, unfortunately, very common occurrences. When the delays result in a claim, either by the owner for being unable to occupy and use the facility or by the contractor for the additional costs of the delayed work, it is important to be able to identify which of the parties is responsible and to what extent. In delay situations arising out of complex projects, the actions of both parties usually contribute to the overall project delay. The challenge is to determine the extent of each parties' responsibility both in terms of delay and to determine the damages that result.
There are a number of different methodologies that can be used to make this determination. Some have wider acceptance than others by courts-of-law and by the claims consulting community. Some have found wider acceptance in North America, while others are more likely to be found in use in Europe. One industry expert recently identified thirteen such methodologies.
Almost all use the critical path method ("CPM") schedule as the base on which to build the delay analysis. The quality and level of detail of the as-planned schedule and the accuracy of the as-built schedule will materially impact the results of whatever methodology is selected by the practitioner. The as-built schedule is usually developed from the project documentation. Obviously the quality and comprehensiveness of the documentation limit the accuracy of the as-built schedule.
Since a CPM schedule is a model of expected (as-planned) or experienced (as-built) events and activities leading to and necessary for project completion, the comparison of the two schedules allows the expert to identify the impact of event that delayed the project. Assuming the documentation supports the contention, the Legis expert can then identify the responsible party.