£800,000 of additional value recovered following major disruption
Forestry Subcontractor | Infrastructure Project
KEY DETAILS
CLIENT TYPE
Forestry subcontractor
SECTOR
Infrastructure and site clearance
PROJECT SCOPE
Site clearance works
CONTRACT SUM
£1.1 million
FORM OF CONTRACT
NEC4 Engineering and Construction Subcontract Option B
COMMERCIAL ISSUE
Restricted access, disruption and prolongation
ADDITIONAL VALUE RECOVERED
£800,000
PRIMARY SERVICE AREAS
Margin Protection & Revenue Recovery; Commercial Troubleshooting & Intervention; Contractual Risk & Entitlement Strategy
Introduction
A forestry subcontractor delivering site clearance works on a major infrastructure project experienced prolonged disruption because other contractors repeatedly failed to provide access to the work areas.
The Tier 1 contractor rejected responsibility and argued that the delays were caused by the subcontractor’s own resourcing and adverse weather.
Roxburgh Murray reviewed the contractual position, identified multiple Compensation Events and built a fully evidenced recovery strategy.
Over a six-month period, Roxburgh Murray prepared and submitted notices, produced substantiated quotations, supported the claim with contemporaneous records and negotiated directly with the Tier 1 contractor.
The result was an additional £800,000 of commercial value recovered for the client.
The situation
Primary service areas Margin Protection & Revenue Recovery; Commercial Troubleshooting & Intervention; Contractual Risk & Entitlement Strategy
During delivery, access to the work areas was repeatedly restricted because other contractors had not completed the necessary preceding works.
During delivery, access to the work areas was repeatedly restricted because other contractors had not completed the necessary preceding works.
The Tier 1 contractor rejected responsibility and argued that the delays were caused by the subcontractor’s own resourcing, adverse weather and risks that sat with the subcontractor.
If that position had been accepted, the subcontractor would have had no meaningful route to recover the additional value created by the disruption.
Roxburgh Murray was brought in to review the cause, the contract and the available evidence.
The commercial risk
The subcontractor faced the risk of absorbing the full financial impact of the disruption.
⬤
Reduced productivity
⬤
Non-productive labour and plant
⬤
Prolonged site presence
⬤
Increased supervision and management costs
⬤
Disruption to planned sequencing
⬤
Pressure on cashflow
⬤
A weaker final account position
⬤
Significant under-recovery
The critical issue was causation.
If the delays were accepted as a subcontractor resourcing or weather problem, recovery would have been severely restricted.
If the true cause could be shown to arise from restricted access and the actions of others, a valid contractual route to recovery existed.
Roxburgh Murray’s review
Roxburgh Murray reviewed the NEC4 subcontract and the circumstances surrounding the disruption.
The analysis established that access to the works had not been provided as required and that the resulting non-productive conditions were caused by other contractors.
This changed the commercial position.
Rather than treating the disruption as the subcontractor’s own risk, Roxburgh Murray identified multiple Compensation Events arising from restricted access and delay caused by others.
That provided the basis for a structured recovery strategy under the contract.
The Roxburgh Murray approach
Roxburgh Murray led the recovery process over a six-month period.
⬤
Reviewing the NEC4 subcontract
⬤
Analysing the true cause of delay and disruption
⬤
Identifying the relevant Compensation Events
⬤
Preparing and submitting Compensation Event notifications
⬤
Producing fully substantiated quotations
⬤
Valuing the impact in accordance with the contract
⬤
Supporting each element with contemporaneous records
⬤
Demonstrating the effect on productivity and programme
⬤
Negotiating directly with the Tier 1 contractor
⬤
Maintaining commercial pressure through to agreement
The strength of the case came from combining contract analysis, evidence, valuation and negotiation.
It was not enough to say the subcontractor had been disrupted. Roxburgh Murray had to show why the disruption was compensable, how it affected the works and what additional value was due.
The outcome
The Compensation Events were accepted and valued in accordance with the NEC contract.
This resulted in an additional £800,000 of value recovered for the subcontractor.
The outcome significantly improved the commercial position on a £1.1 million subcontract and prevented substantial value from being lost.
What this shows
This case demonstrates the importance of identifying the true cause of disruption.
The Tier 1 contractor’s initial position placed responsibility with the subcontractor. Roxburgh Murray’s analysis showed that the disruption resulted from restricted access caused by others.
That distinction was commercially critical.
⬤
Challenge the initial narrative
⬤
Identify valid Compensation Events
⬤
Protect contractual entitlement
⬤
Build a fully evidenced valuation
⬤
Negotiate from a stronger position
⬤
Recover substantial additional value
The director-level lesson is clear:
Disruption does not create recovery on its own. Value is recovered when cause, contract, evidence and valuation are brought together in a disciplined commercial strategy.
Why it matters to construction leaders
Disruption claims are often difficult because responsibility can be disputed and productivity loss is not always obvious from headline project records.
Where several contractors are working on the same site, access, sequencing and dependency issues can create major commercial exposure.
For directors and commercial leaders, this case highlights the importance of asking:
⬤
What is the true cause of the disruption?
⬤
Who carries the risk under the contract?
⬤
Were the correct notices issued?
⬤
Is the productivity impact evidenced?
⬤
Are the quotations contractually compliant?
⬤
s the business recovering the full value created by the disruption?
⬤
s the opposing party’s version of events being tested properly?
Roxburgh Murray helps clients answer those questions before value is lost.
Related services
Roxburgh Murray helps clients identify, evidence and recover the additional value arising from disruption, delay, variations and Compensation Events.
Roxburgh Murray reviews contracts through a commercial lens, identifying risk allocation, notice requirements and entitlement routes that can materially affect project outcomes.
When a project issue needs urgent control, Roxburgh Murray provides focused intervention to identify the cause, assess entitlement and create a practical recovery strategy.
Roxburgh Murray supports commercial negotiations with robust evidence, clear contractual reasoning and a focus on achieving fair value.
Is a disruption affecting the
value of your project?
If restricted access, sequencing issues, delay or non-productive working are affecting your commercial position, early review can make a material difference. Roxburgh Murray can assess the contract, identify entitlement, review the evidence and help recover the value your business is due.