Claim Appendices and Editing

In previous ICCP blogs we have dealt with what should be included in a claim narrative and how the narrative should be formatted, presented and written to enhance the chances of an award being made in a timely manner. In this blog, we discuss the records, evidence and substantiation of the claim, how they should be presented within the document and the final stages that you need to go through before the claim is ready for submission.

Arrangement of the Appendices

When the claim narrative has been completed, we usually sit back and congratulate ourselves because all the research, the collecting of evidence and the hard work of writing the narrative has been completed. Unfortunately, however, we still have quite a lot of work to do to put the claim document in a suitable condition for submission. In previous Top Tips papers, we discussed the subjects of making the document user-friendly and ensuring that it is a stand-alone document with the inclusion of exhibits and additional documents to provide substantiation of statements made in the narrative and the costs used in the calculations. Much of this is achieved by the use, and the organisation of, the appendices.

An effective way to make the document user-friendly is to compile the submission in two volumes, with the narrative contained in the first volume and the supporting documentation in a separate volume or volumes. This allows the reviewer to refer to the supporting documents whilst reading the narrative contained in the first volume. The narrative will contain numerous references to exhibits and other documents offered to support the claim and such documents should be separated into appendices and arranged in a logical manner. Each appendix should have dividers with clearly-labelled tabs and, if necessary, the appendices should have sub-dividers to assist in the location of documents. For example, if Appendix A contains exhibits referenced 1 to 20, then each individual exhibit should be located behind a sub-divider with an appropriate label from 1 to 20. The inclusion of all the information within the claim document will ensure that, as well as being user-friendly, the claim will be able to be reviewed by someone unfamiliar with the project or the circumstances surrounding the events leading to the claim and they will be able to gain a complete understanding of the whole issue without the need for any external references.

For example, the organisation of the appendices for a typical claim would be as follows:

APPENDICES

  1. List of Exhibits
  2. EOT 2 Baseline Programme
  3. Revision-C Drawings of the Transformer Room
  4. Photographic Records Showing the Status of the Transformer Room at the Time when
  5. the Alteration Work was Instructed
  6. Extracts from the Contractor’s Monthly Report for December 2012 Showing the
  7. Contractor ’s Progress Against the Baseline Programme
  8. Revision-D Drawings of the Transformer Room
  9. Impacted As-Planned Programme
  10. Extracts from the Contractor’s Audited Accounts for 2013, 2014 and 2015
  11. Cost Calculations
  12. Supporting Information for the Cost Calculations

The above are arranged in the approximate order in which they appear in the narrative.

The appendices should be shown on the contents page of the claim narrative and also on the volumes containing the appendices. If the appendices are contained in more than one volume, each volume should have an individual contents page detailing the appendices contained in that volume. Each appendix should include a flysheet behind the divider separating the appendices; the annotation on the flysheet should match the list of contents.

Exhibits are copies of the project records that are used to substantiate statements made in the claim. The exhibits should be listed on a separate contents page and either arranged in chronological order or in the order in which they appear in the narrative. If the latter method is adopted, however, it should be noted that if it is necessary to refer to a particular exhibit more than once within the narrative, the order will soon become illogical.

A very user-friendly way of referencing substantiating documents within the narrative is by including cross-references to the exhibits by the use of footnotes. Whilst it is tempting to give each exhibit an exhibit number in the footnotes at the time of writing the narrative, e.g.Exhibit 19 – Daily Site Report, 21/11/12, I can guarantee that if this method is adopted, the exhibit numbers will have to be revised at a later date. Most likely, this will be necessary because during editing, or following a review by another person, it will be necessary to introduce an addition to the narrative that requires additional substantiation, or an additional exhibit will be required to substantiate something or other. When this happens, and especially if the exhibits are arranged in chronological order, any numbers allocated to the exhibits will need to be revised. For this reason, it is better to leave the numbering of the exhibits until such time as all editing and internal reviews have been completed and a complete list of exhibits has been established and listed in the List of Exhibits. (Download PDF version of this blog, which includes a sample List of Exhibits).

Editing and Review

We are now at the stage where the narrative has been completed and the appendices have been compiled. Whilst it may be tempting at this point to breathe a sigh of relief, press ‘print’ and submit the claim document, we still have two important tasks to complete.

Firstly, we need to review and edit the whole submission document and secondly, we need to have the exercise repeated by a second person. If the person deputised to carry out the review has no knowledge of the project or the circumstances surrounding the claim, then so much the better because he will be reviewing the document from a totally-fresh point of view. Consequently, if something does not make sense to him or requires additional explanation, then this subject should be revisited and revised by the author.

The reviewer should put themselves in the place of the person who will eventually have the task of dealing with the claim and advise the author on unclear passages, incorrect grammar, unsubstantiated statements and the like. The reviewer should also refer to any programmes, calculations and the like that are referenced in the document to ensure that the narrative has incorporated the correct information, that explanations contained in the narrative are easily followed and that any cross-references to other documents are correct. Calculations should also be mathematically checked at this stage.

It is almost inevitable that when the editing and in-house review have been completed, revisions and changes will have to be made. When making such changes it is important to remember to revise all sections affected by the change. For example, if it is necessary to change one of the calculations included in the calculation sheets, it will probably be necessary to make corresponding revisions to the narrative in one or more places and probably also in the Executive Summary.

It is usually the case that when a claim is submitted it will be the subject of discussion and used as a basis for negotiations with the other party. Consequently, it is often necessary to produce a revised version of the claim, either to add additional information, or to change something that has been agreed during the negotiation process. In such situations, care must be taken to ensure that the whole of the revised document remains consistent. For example, if a calculation has to be revised which results in a new amount for the claimed additional payment, then the sections of the narrative that deal with the additional payment will need to be revised in order to maintain consistency with the newly-calculated figure, as will the Executive Summary and possibly other sections.

Enjoyed this article? Get more knowledge and best practice tips; join the ICCP member community today. See membership options

Privacy Preference Center