Driver Trett Digest Issue 26 - Flipbook - Page 33
DIGEST | ISSUE 26
The basics of clearly drafting the
narrative of an event that has
occurred can often be lost when
drafting an EOT claim.
6. Effect-Cause – in contrast, other methods of delay
analysis will begin with identifying critical delay (the
effect) and then look to establish the reason for the
delay (the cause). This method is generally adopted
where the works have been completed or when the
effect of the event has concluded.
It is important for the delay analysis narrative to align
with the narrative and the chronology of the event
which may be detailed in another section of the claim.
Often, the narrative of the event and the delay analysis
narrative is drafted by separate individuals which
may lead to misalignment and conflicting information
between the two sections.
Consideration should be given to the fact that the
recipient of a claim may not be an expert in the field
of delay analysis or overly familiar with delay analysis.
Therefore, the narrative should be drafted in a manner
that a person who is not technically versed in delay
analysis methodology can understand it, including a
detailed step-by-step explanation within the ‘claim’.
CONCLUSION
To conclude, the following takeaway points can enhance
the possibility of a successful outcome of an EOT claim:
When drafting the narrative of the event, use a
detailed and factual chronology, substantiated
through project records.
When establishing entitlement to an extension of
time, use the correct provisions of the contract.
The delay analysis methodology chosen and the
logic surrounding the same should be explained as
part of the narrative.
The delay analysis section of the claim should be
clearly drafted in a manner that a non-technical
person may understand.
The delay analysis narrative should align with the
narrative explaining the event.
33