Liquidated and Ascertained Damages, Delay and Data Analysis

Manchester

The Assignment

To determine the amount of liquidated and ascertained damages (LADs) due to the employer based on the dates that the main contractor completed the works in accordance with the as-built data and the contractual amounts for LADs.

  • The 53 Quantum team comprised five persons.
  • Contract duration approx. six months.
  • Approx. dispute value £25m.
  • Dispute procedure. Arbitration.

Project & Background

The main contractor's works comprised the refurbishment of several existing buildings within a live environment within the overall estate.

A dispute arose between the employer and main contractor regarding:

  • the Liability for LADs, and if due to the employer
  • the amount of LADs due to it.

The employer denied liability for LADs and asserted that even if it were liable, the amount calculated by the employer for LADs was incorrect.

Each of the 10 different buildings being refurbished, had multiple floor levels, with each floor situated within an overall. compartment. Each compartment area was divided into departments. Each department contained rooms and areas. Each room had a name and unique room reference. Each area, including corridors, stairwells, elevators, communal spaces, and reception areas, was also subject to the calculation.

The contract expressed the LAD per day amount based on each unique room reference.

A complication in calculating the potential LAD amount was that each room had multiple dates by which specific work tasks were undertaken by the main contractor.

Furthermore, internal dividing walls have two sides. Consequently, the calculation required to determine the maximum date for all or any works undertaken within or impacting the completion of a particular room.

This consideration was crucial to the LAD calculation, as the LADs relate to the date that the room or area were completed.

Method Adopted

  • Task 1First, we created a clean data set from all the contract drawings, including the building name, floor level, compartment, department, area name, room name, and room number reference.
  • Task 2Second, we integrated work records data from disparate data sources and formats into a unified data set. This provided a mini works schedule for each unique room and the dates on which the works were undertaken.
  • Task 3Third, we createdan electronic data set containing the contract data for the LAD amount based on the unique room or area reference.
  • Task 4Fourth, we joined the employer's calculation for its claim for LADs to more granular information and established and created relationships between data sets using an automated data model.

Finally, we developed and deployed a secure online interactive custom multi-level dashboard that the team could utilise, facilitating the analysis of these data for a comprehensive understanding of the matter.

The data engine that powered the visual dashboard did all the heavy lifting of the various filtering of data calculations in near real-time. The dashboard enabled the user to easily filter these data and to see the results.

The user could easily filter these data sets and resultant calculations by building, compartment, department, area, room reference, date, or any combination. The dashboard also provided an authorised user with the ability to extract these data (as filtered or all of it) simply at the click of a button.

The summary provided an instant comparison of the contractor's assessment to the employer's claim for LADs.

Resolution

The matter was successfully resolved between the parties prior to the arbiter's award. Subsequently, we were requested to undertake another project by the main contractor, which was equally intricate as this one, maintaining our standard of delivery.