In Disputes, Project Data Must Be Indisputable

Construction disputes are a frequently costly affair when the scale of the project in question is significant or the claims are difficult to ascertain. The costs for settlement (since a large share of contracts prescribe mediation) are one thing, but so are legal and administrative fees as well as fees to other professional services such as forensic accountants and quantity surveyors. Already operating with slim margins, most construction firms cannot afford the gut punch that comes with such disputes. Armed with high quality data, though, they needn’t. 

Geometrid had a conversation with Leonard Chew from CMS Holborn Asia to better understand the inner workings of construction disputes and what firms need to keep on their radar to best ensure favourable settlements or outcomes from disputes. We found that it pays its weight in gold to understand how your data could be the star of your legal team. 

“Disputes could arise at any stage of the project lifecycle,” explained Leonard, “But payment disputes in Singapore are typically across downstream issues, when cash-strapped contractors depend on developers who have better cash flows during the initial sunk-cost period; and upstream issues as later the developers find issues in completed work.” 

Beyond this, there are three broad categories of construction disputes: 

1. Delays: Delays are caused when milestones for project completion are not met at the specified or expected deadline. This could be caused by lack of labour, materials delays, contractor inefficiency, or variation in estimates and specs from clients.
2. Defects: Defects can be caused by several factors: design issues, workmanship issues, materials issues, or maintenance issues. Disputes arise when a completed work or component is held against a benchmark and found to be lacking.
3. Variations: A variation from the original scope of work can lead to dispute if the client did not seek this variation or the contractor did not expect it in the scope of work. It’s ultimately based on the value of the equipment, materials, and manpower required to complete the variation or to undo the variation and restore the original work. 

These disputes all have in common, among other things, a lack of comprehensive or conclusive data from both parties but contractors and subcontractors in particular. The latter often don’t invest in the technology and processes needed to adequately capture data in an unimpeachable way should disputes arise down the road.  

In construction disputes, who has the bigger pile of papers has a better chance of favourable dispute resolution: the more data one has, the more one is empowered to either defend themselves from claims or make claims

Data of multiple kinds is essential to defend against or advance dispute claims: status tracking of elements to check for delays and pinpoint causes, daily or weekly progress reports, and data on QA/QC statuses at the factory. 

This data is important in mitigating dispute resolution risk for several reasons: 

In construction disputes, who has the bigger pile of papers has a better chance of favourable dispute resolution: the more data one has, the more one is empowered to either defend themselves from claims or make claims. “The mechanisms of contracts are often not functionally understood by firms; there are often clear guidelines for submission of notifications for evaluation by a certain time in order to successfully make claims.” Delays in data reporting and consolidation often contribute to sloppy notification submissions. 

Geometrid allows for progress data to be recorded across the entire supply chain in real-time with no lag for collection and consolidation across multiple stakeholders, and across multiple time periods: seamlessly and securely. 

Construction dispute risk is greatly mitigated by having rich, accurate, and unbiased (automated) data generation that can be used in the context of internal contract provisions and penalties for certain lapses; there is no need to trigger a dispute and then squeeze out the data with QSs if the data is well-recorded and presented transparently from day one.

As Leonard mentions, the sources of data that often come into play in construction disputes include “BIM, progress reports which are usually weekly, architect’s designs, schedules, programmes, client milestones and timelines, and geotechnical reports subject to further investigation.” All of these represent multiple data streams that, if not properly consolidated using a first-rate system, can lead to scattered and unsuable data for dispute purposes. 

Geometrid’s ease of use means that data can be accurately inputted with minimal error by anyone in the construction project. Its automated aggregation of data and reports generation allows for transparent insight and problem detection at any stage. Geometrid is based on your BIM model and is the platform for weekly (or even daily) updates.

Settlements are often decided on the basis of the scale of the damages or rectification to be accounted for; accurate data means accurate settlements that aren’t above or below what’s required. Geometrid’s data tracking--thanks to its ease of use and reliance on unique tracking IDs—allows for the minimisation of errors and bias from manual consolidation and ensures the accuracy of your data.

Contractors must invest to have their data speak on their behalf for more powerfully than your contract or your conscience, and rest easy knowing that your claims are defensible or justifiable with high-quality comprehensive information. Because, after all, as Leonard put it best: “In an ideal world, we wouldn’t need construction dispute resolution.”