Construction delay disputes can be complex, costly, and contentious. The difference between a successful claim and a failed one often comes down to one critical factor: the quality of project records. In a recent presentation, David Moreland, Director of MoreConsult Limited, shared practical insights on how construction professionals can leverage proper documentation and emerging technologies to support delay analysis and claims.
The Foundation: Records, Records, Records
David emphasized a principle that cannot be overstated in construction disputes: contemporaneous record-keeping is paramount. As the Society of Construction Law (SCL) Delay and Disruption Protocol makes clear, “records relevant to progress and delay and disruption events must be generated contemporaneously as the works progress, and not afterwards.”
The Protocol provides a structured framework, identifying six essential categories of records that contracting parties should maintain:
- Programme documentation
- Progress records
- Resource allocation data
- Cost information
- Correspondence and administration
- Contract and tender documents
Daily Documentation That Matters
Effective record-keeping begins on site, every day. David highlighted three critical areas that require consistent documentation:
Daily Site Documentation – capturing what actually happened each day, including weather conditions, labour allocation, plant movements, and work completed or delayed.
Communication Records – maintaining a clear audit trail of instructions, variations, and correspondence between all parties.
Programme Documentation – ensuring baseline programmes are maintained in native format and regularly updated to reflect actual progress, variations, and any granted Extensions of Time.
Asking the Right Questions at Progress Meetings
For contract administrators and project managers, David suggested four key questions to ask contractors during progress meetings:
- Critical Path – What critical path activities were planned for this month?
- Progress – What specific progress and milestones were achieved on critical path items?
- Blockers & Challenges – What obstacles or issues prevented completion of planned work?
- Recovery Plan – What specific actions and timeline adjustments are proposed to get back on schedule?
These questions help ensure that potential delays are identified and documented early, before they escalate into major disputes.
The Reality of Delay Analysis
When disputes arise, the available records determine which delay analysis methodologies can be applied. David explained the distinction between:
Retrospective Analysis (such as As Planned vs As Built Windows Analysis) – which requires baseline programmes and comprehensive as-built records from progress reports and meeting minutes.
Prospective Analysis (such as Time Impact Analysis) – which demands logic-linked baseline programmes, updated progressed programmes, and detailed records of delay events for impact modeling.
Common Pitfalls and Practical Solutions
Through his forensic work, David has identified recurring issues that undermine delay claims:
- Irreconcilable programmes between different versions
- Missing native programme files or lack of regular updates
- Programmes with incorrect as-built dates
- Conflicting evidence regarding causation
His recommended solutions focus on fact-based approaches: using joint records such as meeting minutes and progress reports, verifying programme data against as-built evidence, and building a comprehensive picture from multiple contemporaneous sources.
Case Study: The Power of Detailed Records
David shared an example from a recent disruption claim involving hard landscaping works at a UK university project. Despite the absence of a traditional “measured mile” for productivity comparison, the contractor’s meticulous record-keeping proved decisive. Hourly labour allocation records, detailed output measurements, photographs documenting access issues, and a matrix of Compensation Events (CVIs) allowed for a robust analysis of disrupted productivity.
This case demonstrates that when programmes fail, comprehensive daily records can still support a valid claim.
Technology Transforming Record-Keeping
The presentation concluded with an overview of emerging technologies that are revolutionizing construction documentation:
Digital Site Diaries – platforms like Sablono and Fieldwire allow engineers to record daily activities in under 60 seconds, automatically integrate weather data, and share progress updates directly from site.
Reality Capture – solutions such as OpenSpace Air consolidate data from drones, 360-degree cameras, mobile phones, and laser scanners into comprehensive visual archives. These create permanent, time-stamped records of project conditions and progress.
Drone Technology – aerial monitoring provides detailed progress tracking, inspection capabilities, and early issue identification, with seamless integration into BIM platforms.
The Bottom Line
Davids core message was unequivocal: proper record-keeping is not just a contractual obligation—it’s the foundation of any successful delay claim and the best defense against spurious claims. As he noted in closing, “if your project is in delay, bring in expert help early” to ensure records are being captured and maintained to the standard required for dispute resolution.
For construction professionals, the investment in robust, contemporaneous record-keeping systems—whether traditional or technology-enabled—pays dividends when delays occur and disputes arise. The question is not whether to maintain detailed records, but whether you can afford not to.