Variation, extension of time and payment claim assessment, NZS 3910

What to send

The contract, including Schedule 1 and any special conditions
The claim and the notices behind it
For time, the accepted programme as the native MS Project file, not a PDF. The logic matters more than the dates
Site diaries, photos, test results and correspondence for the period
Any earlier assessment or response, if there is one

If some of that doesn’t exist, tell me. That’s worth knowing early and it shapes where to start.

What you get back

A written assessment memo. The answer is on page 1. Everything behind it is set out so the reader can check it and see exactly where it departs from either party’s position. For a variation with time attached it usually runs like this:

Assessment memo, typical structure

Purpose and recommendation. What was claimed, what’s recommended and the difference, up front
Background. A dated history of the instruction and events, each one tied to its source
The claim. Each element of the claim set against the assessed position
Entitlement. Whether it’s a variation under the contract and why
Time. The method, the assumptions and, for a disputed period, a day by day table
Value. Rates, quantities and every adjustment with its reason
Anything reserved. Questions like notice timing are stated and reserved, not quietly waived

I assess and recommend. The decision stays with the Engineer, Contract Administrator or Independent Certifier.

How it’s done

The contract and the record first

Not either party’s account. The clause, the specification, then the diaries, the site camera, the test results and the emails. If that doesn’t settle a technical point, it goes to someone who has dealt with it before. I don’t commit to a position until one of them supports it.

Delay on the programme logic

An event can be real and still not delay completion. So time is assessed on the accepted programme, with actual dates loaded and weather set to zero so the Principal’s risk is isolated. For a disputed period I build 3 timelines side by side: no event, the event handled at a reasonable pace and what actually happened. The gap between the first 2 is the Principal’s. The gap between the last 2 is the contractor’s. None of the assumptions asks the contractor to go faster than it did or said it would. How the 3 timelines work →

Remeasured, not guessed

On a payment claim, items I can verify are passed. Items that need adjusting get a reason. Items I can’t verify are named as such, not guessed at. Lump sums that aren’t finished aren’t paid as finished. On NZTA contracts that includes Schedule 17 cost fluctuation, where negative months are deferred and trued up, not dropped.

Fair both ways

If the contractor has a point, the assessment says so. If I’ve got something wrong, I correct it, whether or not anyone has noticed.

Related insights

The variation that isn’t what it says →
Splitting the days: how a delay claim actually gets assessed →
Charging costs back to the contractor →
Payment claims: the 8 places the number goes wrong →
The contractor’s claim workbook: 7 things to check →

Timing and cost

Tell me your deadline on the first call and I’ll tell you straight whether I can meet it. Each assessment is priced once I’ve seen what’s involved, so you know the cost before I start.