Resolution or Ruin: The Final Outcome of Two Claims

Series: A Tale of Two Claims | Part 5 of 5

Looking Back to Look Ahead
Throughout this five-part series, we’ve followed two nearly identical construction projects—Project West and Project East—from the field to the negotiating table.

• Post 1 introduced the story: similar scope, same owner, different outcomes.
• Post 2 revealed how daily reports shaped the record of disruption.
• Post 3 examined how structured cost tracking built, or broke, the case.
• Post 4 unpacked the power of the claim narrative to tie everything together.

Now, in this final post, we step into the most consequential chapter: how it all ended.

One project achieves a negotiated resolution, preserves its reputation, and sets up future success. The other stumbles into costly litigation, internal conflict, and lost opportunity. The difference isn’t luck; it is structure, discipline, and the right support at the right time.

Project West: The Claim That Collapsed Under Its Own Weight
Nine months after the underground obstruction incident, Paul’s team formally submitted its certified claim under FAR 52.233-1 Disputes. The REA had been denied earlier, citing insufficient documentation, lack of schedule analysis support, and no clear entitlement. But Paul’s team believed it had a strong case… After all, the field impact was real.

But from the outset, trouble emerged.

• The claim relied on an As-Planned vs. As-Built delay analysis (AACE Recommended Practice 29R-03, MIP 3.1), constructed months after the fact using incomplete schedule data.
• Cost estimates blended base scope and change-related hours, without contemporaneous records to distinguish them.
• Daily reports were sparse, and no formal or constructive notice had been issued at the time of impact.
• The claim narrative was spreadsheet-heavy but story-light, with vague assertions of owner fault and minimal linkage to contract clauses.

At the Contracting Officer’s request, the claim was transferred to the agency’s legal division. Outside counsel hired a forensic consultant to assess the claim’s validity, and the consultant quickly flagged fatal gaps.

By the time Paul’s team appeared before the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals (CBCA), it had racked up hundreds of thousands in legal and expert witness fees, spent six months in document discovery, and faced a skeptical board judge.

The results:

• Claim denied in full.
• Years lost.
• No compensation.

Worse still, the Contracting Officer added a negative performance evaluation into the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), weakening the firm’s chances on future federal pursuits.

Project East: Resolution Without a Courtroom
On the other hand, Maria’s team took a very different route.

After preparing a detailed REA supported by contemporaneous documentation, her team worked proactively with its consultant to create a compelling, fact-based, and legally sound claim narrative.

The backbone of the claim included:

• Schedule analysis based on Contemporaneous Period Analysis (AACE Recommended Practice 29R-03, MIP 3.3), using live updates from the time of delay
• Structured cost logs tagged with unique codes like “2.14.4 – Unforeseen Conditions (Trench 2)” that aligned with schedule fragnets
• Daily reports detailing activity IDs, labor breakdowns, and photo evidence
• RFIs, emails, and field memos showing timely notice and mitigation actions
• Contract clauses cited with precision: FAR 52.236-2 Differing Site Conditions and FAR 52.243-4 Changes

The final narrative guided the reader logically:

1. What happened
2. Why it was beyond the contractor’s control
3. What the team did to respond
4. What contract clauses applied
5. How the cost and schedule impact were supported

When submitted, the agency’s technical reviewers found little to dispute. They requested clarifications on subcontractor markup and idle equipment logs but made no fundamental objections to the entitlement.

Three weeks later, the Contracting Officer issued a determination:

• Recommended for partial settlement at 92% of contractor’s request.
• No certified claim necessary.
• Positive CPARS review issued.

The agency even invited Maria’s firm to present lessons learned at an upcoming industry event, a sign of mutual respect.

What Made the Difference?

Owners and Agencies Are Reading Between the Lines
Whether you’re dealing with a federal agency, a state DOT, or a private owner, the story your claim tells, and the clarity of your evidence, affect more than just dollars:

• They determine how quickly your claim is resolved.
• They shape the owner’s perception of your team.
• They influence whether future disputes escalate or are resolved early.
• They can either protect or harm your reputation across the industry.

And in many cases, the decision to negotiate or litigate hinges not just on what happens, but how well you document why it matters.

How Expert Support Turns the Tide
Project East’s team didn’t build a strong claim by accident. It had structured guidance from Day One, from the field through the final submission. Expert consultants played a pivotal role in:

• Designing defensible documentation processes
• Identifying best-fit AACE methodologies for schedule analysis
• Structuring the REA and narrative to anticipate reviewer concerns
• Coaching field and office personnel on capturing what really matters

These are the advantages that experienced consultants like Long International bring. Not just in dispute resolution, but in helping teams build stronger, claim-ready projects from the start.

Our team doesn’t just react to problems; we help prevent them. And when disruption does occur, we make sure your record tells the real story.

Final Word: The Claim Is Written Before the Submission
By the time a claim is submitted, most of the outcome has already been determined:

• Were the right cost codes in place?
• Were field notes detailed and consistent?
• Did the team understand and comply with contract terms?
• Did the team contemporaneously apply proper scheduling techniques to support a future REA, or was the disruption reconstructed months later?

For Project East, the answers were all yes. For Project West, they were not.

Your team’s documentation, processes, and approach are writing your future, long before a claim is ever filed. And whether that future ends in resolution or ruin depends on the foundation you build every day.

Ready to Build a Stronger Claim Strategy?
If your project is approaching a dispute, or if you want to audit your current documentation, talk to us. Long International supports clients across the project lifecycle: from proactive prevention to claims preparation and expert witness services.

Explore our new Federal Services Brochure.

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

Blog

Discover industry insights on construction disputes and claims, project management, risk analysis, and more.

MORE

Articles

Articles by our engineering and construction claims experts cover topics ranging from acceleration to why claims occur.

MORE

Publications

We are committed to sharing industry knowledge through publication of our books and presentations.

MORE