Keeping the relationship through a claim: the job goes on while the claim is decided
A delay claim is now with the companies' commercial representatives. At the weekly meeting, every delivery discussion turns into an argument about responsibility. The next work areas still need access decisions and the crews need an agreed plan for tomorrow.
Give formal claim decisions a named commercial channel and keep ordinary site coordination focused on the work that still needs decisions. Connect the two when scope, instructions or timing affect both. A respectful working relationship does not require hiding facts, abandoning the claim or allowing commercial disagreement to consume every crew briefing. Ask advisers about actual performance obligations and disputed directions; a claim by itself does not answer those questions.
Keep the work conversation useful during the disagreement
- Name the claim representatives. Confirm who sends formal correspondence, receives responses and can discuss settlement. Tell the site team where to route commercial questions. Provide a contact and clear escalation route rather than a vague instruction that nobody on site may mention the disputed event.
- Plan ordinary coordination deliberately. Keep meetings focused on upcoming areas, access, interfaces, inspections and decisions needed for the authorized work. Record owners and dates. Put a commercial issue on its proper agenda when necessary; do not let an unresolved argument replace a decision about tomorrow's access or a required instruction.
- Keep facts flowing between the channels. Continue accurate reports, quantities, resource records and dated observations through the project process. Route a new instruction or scope ambiguity promptly to the relevant commercial representative. Crews should report conditions and concerns, not edit their account to improve one party's claim position.
- Use a consistent tone and decision record. Describe the event and requested action without personal accusations. Confirm practical arrangements in the normal written form and have advisers review wording where rights or disputed obligations are affected. Courtesy is useful; it is not a substitute for a required notice or authorized agreement.
- Escalate blocked or unsafe decisions. If the disagreement prevents an important instruction, bring the issue to the people authorized to resolve it. Use the site safety process for hazards and qualified assessment where needed. Do not ask crews to proceed simply to protect the relationship or assume they can suspend work without the required review.
Common mistakes
- Turning each routine meeting into a replay of the whole claim.
- Telling crews to stop reporting inconvenient conditions.
- Treating goodwill as authority to accept a disputed instruction.
Checklist
Two channels with a clear connection
- Named formal claim representatives.
- Useful coordination agenda and decision owners.
- Accurate facts still collected and routed.
- New scope and timing issues escalated.
- Respectful records with appropriate wording review.
- Safety and performance questions addressed through authority.
Check your understanding
A foreman observes another blocked access route, but the event may affect the claim. Should it stay out of the daily report?
