HC advocates the settlement of contract disputes through negotiated settlements in lieu of costly and time-consuming arbitration or litigation. HC assists clients in developing factually based analyses, reports and/or proposals that position them for settlement, recovery and/or mitigation of project costs and risks. HC possesses a unique yet fundamental approach to disputes management and resolution.
HC's approach to every engagement includes specific decision points and milestones that allow our clients to effectively control resources and the scope of each engagement to provide the client the commensurate control of the cost and time of the engagement. HC performs an evaluation of each dispute, including a preliminary investigation and analysis that results in a decision point that is tailored to your business objectives and legal strategies.
As illustrated below, HC evaluates a project utilizing a systematic approach; fully understanding the interrelationships between the project record, issue files, contract documents, project cost records, and schedules, including periodic schedule updates. This systematic approach allows proper identification of cause and effect relationships between entitlement issues and cost/schedule impacts.
HC's disciplined methodology and approach toward claims analysis and negotiation are established around a bottom-up theme, where feasible. Complete knowledge and understanding of the contract is critical to the analysis and evaluation of change orders or disputed contract issues. The Contract baseline requirements and their relationship to the contractor's baseline budget and approved CPM schedule forms the basis for all analyses conducted and all positioning strategies recommended by Hendershot Consulting in the process of negotiating settlements or, if necessary, preparing for mediation, arbitration, or litigation.
The contract issues, events, impacts, or changes on the project are evaluated against these baseline contract requirements to determine entitlement and, therefore, overall merit. Should entitlement exist, causal relationships are analyzed to determine whether the client has established: (1) the relationship of issues, events, and impacts for which the adjustment request is based, and (2) a logical connection between these issues/events and the cost/schedule impacts incurred. Concurrently, the reasonableness of costs are examined based upon the client's actions or inactions in incurring them. After completing these basic steps of the analysis and evaluation, the position for a negotiated settlement is formulated based upon the ability to establish these elements factually and causally.
This methodology has been proven through successfully negotiated settlements. It has also been the turning point in arbitrations, mediations, and litigation. It represents both the state-of-the-art and the shape of things to come in our industry.