What caused the delay, and how much time it justifies. Forensic analysis to identify, quantify, and explain project delay — with a method that fits the records, the contract, and the forum.
When a project finishes late, the questions that matter are precise: which events drove the critical path, how much time do they account for, and who is responsible. Answering them well requires a rigorous, transparent method — not assertion.
We select an analysis technique appropriate to the available records, the contract, and the forum in which the issue will be decided, and we apply it consistently. Where time is contested, we address the hard questions head-on: float ownership, pacing, and acceleration.
Our analysis is aligned with the Society of Construction Law Delay and Disruption Protocol and is prepared to the standard expected in formal dispute proceedings.
Prospective or retrospective, the method is chosen to fit the records and the question being asked.
Comparison of the intended programme against what actually happened to expose where and when the project diverged.
Delay events inserted into the baseline to model their theoretical effect on the planned completion date.
Event-by-event modelling on a contemporaneous programme — the preferred prospective method for assessing entitlement.
The programme split into discrete windows to track how the critical path and delay evolved over the project.
The "but-for" technique — removing delay events from the as-built record to isolate their net effect.
Rigorous treatment of causation, float ownership, and pacing — the issues that decide contested time.
A transparent, evidence-led process from raw records to a defensible conclusion.
Programmes, progress data, and contemporaneous records gathered and interrogated.
The baseline and updates tested for integrity before any analysis is built on them.
The technique chosen to suit the records, the contract, and the forum.
Cause and effect traced through the critical path, window by window.
Conclusions on causation and entitlement, clearly evidenced.
Analysis documented to a standard that withstands scrutiny — in negotiation or in formal proceedings.
From a single contested event to a full forensic review at completion, TSconsult provides clear, defensible delay analysis.