The claim's documentation package: what goes in and the order a reviewer reads it
The project manager has sixty daily reports, correspondence and a cost folder for a delay claim. Each document has been saved, but the adviser cannot trace the claimed days to the events described. The coordinator needs to turn the collection into a readable review package.
Start with the defined issue and requested relief, then arrange the basis, notices, chronology and supporting records in a navigable order. Link each important statement to dated evidence and identify gaps or competing accounts. The company's advisers determine the required claim form and analysis; the coordinator makes the material traceable. A large folder, confident narrative or number of tabs does not prove responsibility, a completion effect or a recoverable amount.
Build the review path before adding more attachments
- Write a concise issue summary. Identify the parties, event, locations, requested money or time and the current disagreement. Have the commercial lead check the asserted basis. State what is agreed, disputed or still being investigated so the reviewer understands the question before entering the records.
- Put the formal history next. Gather the pertinent notices, instructions, submissions and responses with delivery references. Build a dated chronology that links those records. Preserve original dates and context; a reconstructed timeline should show its sources instead of becoming an unsupported substitute for them.
- Index the factual evidence. Group relevant reports, permitted photographs, correspondence and resource records under stable references. Mark the passage or location relied on and keep the original accessible. Include material that challenges the account and explain missing periods rather than curating a folder that hides uncertainty.
- Connect the requested time and cost. Link the programme records and analysis to identified events, with qualified review where needed. Reconcile cost build-ups to their support and distinguish estimates from incurred amounts. Do not ask a coordinator's attachment index to stand in for technical analysis or a legal conclusion.
- Test the package and retain the issue. Ask an uninvolved colleague to trace selected statements through the index. Resolve broken references, inconsistent totals and missing revisions. Have the required advisers review form and content, then retain the exact issued package, delivery evidence and subsequent revisions.
Common mistakes
- Providing an attachment dump with no link to the claim narrative.
- Omitting an inconvenient report instead of examining it.
- Treating a schedule screenshot as complete delay analysis.
Checklist
Can another person follow the claim?
- Issue and requested relief defined.
- Basis checked by the authorized reviewer.
- Notice and response history linked.
- Chronology points to original evidence.
- Time and cost support traceable.
- Gaps and contrary material identified.
- Exact issued version and delivery retained.
Check your understanding
The package contains every saved report, but a reader cannot see why twenty-three days are requested. What is missing?
