top of page

Anatomy of a poor quality engineering or construction claim. Digital Perspective paper launch

London, United Kingdom 26 January 2021.

Claim and litigation support specialists Dispute Data launch their first Digital Perspectives paper. Packed with insight and recommendations it shines a light on the underbelly of engineering and construction claims. Discover the hallmarks of poor quality and underlying factors which, if addressed, can prevent a claim being comprised from the outset. Learn how digital naivety leads to spiralling costs and what to do about it.


Find out how to improve the quality of claims, how to drive efficiency gains and control the associated time, cost and quality benefits.

​Engineering and construction commentators have long stated that poor quality claims are a leading cause of dispute. But what constitutes ‘poor quality’, and where should you focus limited resource to ensure claim prospects and business outcomes are not compromised?

This paper will resonate with commercial, claim and dispute managers and the executives that have oversight of them.

It describes the hallmarks of poor quality, their impact and the link with the technology skills shortage in the sector. In addition to numerous recommendations, it highlights competing drivers between client and advisor and machine learning’s potential as a mechanism to achieve a return on investment from claim expenditure.

Click on the cover image below or here to register to download your copy. Report structure included below.

Report Overview

Part 1 - What we see from claim documents

> Emotive language and lack of objectivity

> Difficulty evidencing claimed issues

  1. Confirmation bias impairing perception

  2. Poorly conceived records and the illusion of control

  3. Outdated information request practice

  4. Impeded flow of data to decision makers

  5. Unnecessary write-offs due to flawed cost benefit analysis

> Otherwise avoidable global claims

> Lack of structure and incomplete or vague methodology

> Over-reliance on sampling and extrapolation

> Poor or absent referencing

> Questionable inflation of claim value

> Volume does not trump substance

Part 2 - What we see going on in the background

> Overconfidence that project records will support the desired narrative

> Poor information governance and drip-fed evidence

> Everything and the kitchen sink document production

> The high cost of analogue practices

> The 80:80 opportunity

  • How as much as 80% of claim preparation is attributable to discovery, review, extraction and analysis of data, and

  • How forensic tools and data wrangling can reduce this by as much as 80% creating time, cost and quality opportunity

Closing remarks




Contact us by phone, email or via our social media channels.

bottom of page