Claims and dispute resolution (Unit 10|11)

An APC Candidates Guide.

Unit 10|11 – Claims and dispute resolution.

Competency Standard Unit 10|11 focuses on Claims and Dispute Resolution, which is a specialized area for quantity surveying professionals. This unit outlines the competencies required to effectively manage claims and work towards resolving disputes.

Key aspects covered in this unit include:

Establishing the Background and Collecting Relevant Data: This involves:

- Collecting, analyzing, and evaluating all pertinent information related to a claim.

- Compiling a comprehensive status report.

- Assessing both the best-case and worst-case scenarios.

- Obtaining a brief from the client.

Conducting Negotiations on Claim Settlement: This process includes:

- Identifying the key issues for each party involved.

- Understanding the best-case and worst-case scenarios for each party.

- Facilitating separate and joint meetings with the parties.

- Negotiating the most favorable outcome for the client.

Preparing a Claim and Resolution Status Report for the Client: This involves:

- Keeping the client informed at every stage of the process.

- Briefing the client on both the best-case and worst-case scenarios.

- Presenting the final results and explaining the rationale for the outcome to the client.

In summary, Unit 10|11 details the specialized skills that quantity surveying professionals need to effectively handle claims. This includes gathering necessary information, strategically negotiating settlements, and maintaining clear communication with the client throughout the process.

Notes:

Surprisingly, the AIQS competency framework places little emphasis on concepts like causation, which involves establishing a link between an event and the resulting damage.

In Unit 10, Claims and Dispute Resolution, the focus begins with gathering the relevant background information and all data related to the claim.

Upon first reading these words, I assumed that "relevant data" included establishing causation. However, based on my experience as an APC assessor, it appears that few applicants are encouraged to think along those lines. In practice, Quantity Surveyors (QSs) in Australia often defer to Project Managers (PMs), which can be risky for everyone involved. In the event of a formal dispute, lawyers typically do not prioritize the PM's perspective.

In my opinion, a QS should have a solid understanding of causation—especially if they present themselves as "Forensic Quantity Surveyors," a term that AIQS professionals like Paul McArd FAIQS, CQS advocate.

As Paul puts it:

🙅‍♂️ Not all quantity surveyors are forensic quantity surveyors.

Some QSs can price a variation. Some can manage a package.

Few can explain causation.

Being a forensic QS is about knowing what happened and then backing it up with hard data.

You need to know where to look, for example:

✔️ ITPs

✔️ Site diaries

✔️ Labour curves

✔️ Subbie emails

You also need to ask the right questions and determine the most accurate and reliable answers.

Being a forensic QS isn’t a title, it's a mindset, and a method.

Paul's LinkedIn posts and newsletters are valuable resources, as are various online commentaries from leading law firms. Such as this article on causation by Muhammad Imran Chaudhary of HKA which definitely worth reading.

How causation should be analysed

https://www.hka.com/article/how-causation-should-be-analysed-in-construction-claims/

---

Disclaimer(s): 

This information is for general knowledge purposes only and should not be considered legal advice. It is essential to consult with a qualified legal professional for any legal matters or concerns.

The views expressed in this article/post are those of the author and do not reflect the official stance of the AIQS or any other organisation.