Contemporaneous Records: If You Can't Prove It, You Won't Get Paid

Introduction

Every quantity surveyor has heard this story before: a contractor delivers exceptional work, encounters legitimate variations, and submits a claim months later—only to have it rejected because they can't prove what actually happened on site. The phrase "if you can't prove it, you won't get paid" isn't just a warning; it's the harsh reality of construction claims under NEC contracts.

Contemporaneous records—documentation created at the time events occur—are the single most powerful tool in a QS's arsenal. Yet despite abundant digital tools for site photos, cloud storage, and messaging apps, most contractors still struggle to connect the dots between daily activities and formal compensation events. The difference between a successful claim and a rejected one often comes down to how well you documented events as they unfolded, not how convincingly you can reconstruct them later.

In this guide, we'll explore why real-time record-keeping matters so much, what makes records genuinely "contemporaneous," and how to implement a system that protects your revenue without drowning your team in paperwork.

The £30,000 Lesson: When Poor Records Cost Real Money

A tier 1 contractor recently shared a cautionary tale that perfectly illustrates the stakes. During a highways project, their site manager agreed to a variation with the client's representative—a straightforward scope change that would add roughly two weeks to the programme and cost approximately £30,000 in additional resources.

The conversation happened on site. Both parties nodded in agreement. The work proceeded immediately. But here's what didn't happen: no site diary entry that day documenting the instruction, no contemporaneous note of the agreed cost impact, no early warning notice citing NEC4 clause 16.1, and no compensation event notification under clause 61.3.

Three months later, when the contractor submitted their claim, the client's PM had been replaced. The new PM reviewed the submission and simply replied: "Where's the evidence this was instructed? I see no record of agreement to additional cost." Without contemporaneous documentation linking the instruction to the work performed, the contractor absorbed the entire £30,000 loss.

This isn't an isolated incident. It's a pattern that plays out across the UK construction sector every month, eroding contractor margins and creating unnecessary disputes. The solution isn't complex, but it requires discipline: record events as they happen, not when you're trying to justify payment.

What Makes Records Truly "Contemporaneous"?

The legal definition of contemporaneous records is straightforward: documentation created at or very near the time the recorded events occurred. But in practice, this means more than just adding a quick note to your site diary. Effective contemporaneous records must answer four essential questions:

1. What Actually Happened?

Describe the event in specific, factual terms. "Weather delay" isn't sufficient; "persistent rainfall (22mm over 4 hours) prevented concrete pour for foundations in Grid B-4" provides the detail needed to substantiate a claim. Include times, locations, affected trade contractors, and measurable impacts.

2. Why Was This a Change From the Original Scope?

Connect the event to contract documents. Reference the relevant clauses, drawings, or specifications that establish why this work falls outside the agreed scope. For NEC4 contracts, identify which compensation event category applies (instruction change, design change, unforeseen conditions, etc.).

3. What's the Cost Impact?

Quantify resources affected: labour hours, plant standing time, material waste, subcontractor delays. You don't need final cost figures immediately, but contemporaneous records should capture the basis for your eventual assessment. "3 operatives stood down for 4 hours; 20-tonne excavator idle; concrete delivery rescheduled at £800 premium" provides the foundation for accurate cost recovery.

4. How Does This Affect the Programme?

Document schedule impacts, especially if the event affects the critical path. NEC4 compensation events can include time extensions, but only if you can demonstrate the programme delay was caused by the event and couldn't have been mitigated. Contemporaneous records showing the immediate impact on planned activities are far more credible than retrospective critical path analysis.

The Technology Paradox: More Tools, Same Problems

Modern construction sites generate more documentation than ever before. Site managers snap hundreds of photos daily. Cloud storage preserves every email. Messaging apps maintain timestamped conversations. Yet despite this digital abundance, contractors still lose claims because their records lack context.

The problem isn't quantity; it's cohesion. A photo of standing water on site doesn't prove a compensation event unless it's linked to a site diary entry explaining why work stopped, which notice was issued, and how it affected the critical path. An email thread about design changes has no value in isolation if there's no formal record connecting that discussion to the issued instruction and resulting cost impact.

Think of your site records as evidence in a legal case (because that's exactly what they might become). Individual pieces of evidence—photos, emails, meeting minutes—only gain power when assembled into a coherent narrative. Digital site diary software helps by creating that narrative thread, linking daily observations to formal notices and connecting evidence across different formats.

The Five-Step Framework for Effective Record-Keeping

Step 1: Standardise Your Site Diary Format

Consistency is critical. Every site diary entry should capture the same core data: weather conditions, labour allocation, plant usage, materials received, progress against programme, and most importantly, events that may trigger compensation events or early warnings.

Create templates that prompt the right information. Rather than a blank text box, use structured fields: "Did any events occur today that may trigger a compensation event? (Y/N)" followed by conditional fields for event description, clause reference, immediate impact, and proposed notice timeline.

Step 2: Connect Daily Records to Formal Notices

Under NEC4, you're required to issue early warning notices (clause 16.1) and compensation event notifications (clause 61.3) within specific timeframes. Your site diary should explicitly reference these notices when relevant events occur.

For example, if unexpected ground conditions emerge on Monday, your site diary entry that day should note: "Ground conditions encountered differ from site investigation data—triggers CE notification under clause 60.1(12). Early warning notice EW-024 issued to PM. Supporting photos: IMG_2471-2478. Estimated programme impact: 3 days on foundation works, affects critical path."

Step 3: Capture the "Why," Not Just the "What"

Factual descriptions are essential, but context determines whether you'll get paid. When recording delays, explain the causal chain: "Concrete delivery delayed 4 hours due to traffic accident on A1 (supplier notified us at 07:15, photo of supplier's message attached). This delay pushed foundation pour from Tuesday to Wednesday, delaying the critical path for frame erection by 1 day as crane mobilisation was scheduled for Thursday."

Step 4: Link Evidence Across Systems

Your contemporaneous record in the site diary should reference supporting documentation: photos (with filenames), emails (with subject lines and timestamps), test results (with certificate numbers), and issued notices (with reference numbers). This creates an audit trail that project managers and adjudicators can follow.

Step 5: Issue Notices Promptly

NEC4 contracts impose strict notice periods. Contemporaneous records are most credible when paired with timely formal notices. If you discover a compensation event on Monday but don't issue the notice until Friday, opposing counsel will question whether the event was truly as significant as you claim. Real-time documentation, followed by prompt notice issuance, demonstrates the genuine impact of events.

Real-World Results: Two Contractors, Two Outcomes

The £150,000 Loss

A regional contractor working on a commercial development encountered multiple design changes over 8 months. Their site team diligently photographed everything, saved all emails, and attended regular progress meetings. When they submitted a substantial compensation event claim at practical completion, they had thousands of photos, hundreds of emails, and dozens of meeting minutes.

What they didn't have: a coherent narrative linking specific instructions to specific work activities, contemporaneous cost assessments, or evidence that notices were issued within the required periods. The PM rejected the claim, stating they couldn't establish causation between purported instructions and the work performed. The contractor eventually settled for 15% of their claimed amount—a six-figure loss that could have been avoided with systematic contemporaneous records.

The £40,000 Recovery

By contrast, a smaller contractor using structured site diary software encountered a significant weather event during groundworks. Their site manager's diary entry that day included: weather data (rainfall measurements), work affected (specific foundations), programme impact (delay to critical path), cost implications (labour standing time, plant idle, preliminaries extension), and notice timeline (early warning issued same day, CE notification followed within 48 hours).

Each entry linked to supporting photos (with GPS coordinates and timestamps), referenced the relevant NEC4 clauses, and connected to the formal notice register. When they submitted the claim three weeks later, the PM approved it within a week because the contemporaneous documentation made causation and impact indisputable. The contractor recovered £40,000 with minimal dispute—work that was rightfully theirs because they could prove it happened.

The Commercial Case for Better Record-Keeping

Implementing rigorous contemporaneous record-keeping requires upfront investment: training site teams, establishing new workflows, potentially adopting digital tools that facilitate structured documentation. But the return on investment is substantial:

• Fewer disputed claims: Well-documented compensation events face less resistance from project managers who can clearly see the justification.
• Faster payment: When causation and impact are obvious from contemporaneous records, claims move through approval workflows more quickly.
• Stronger client relationships: Transparent, well-documented claims build trust with clients and consultants who appreciate professional record-keeping.
• Better cost forecasting: Capturing cost impacts in real-time improves your ability to forecast final account positions.
• Enhanced negotiating position: In commercial negotiations or dispute resolution, contemporaneous records give you leverage that reconstructed claims cannot match.

For QS teams managing multiple projects, the efficiency gains are even more significant. Rather than spending weeks reconstructing events from fragmented evidence at the end of a project, you maintain an ongoing record that supports monthly valuations and commercial discussions throughout the contract.

Frequently Asked Questions

How detailed should daily site diary entries be?

Detailed enough to substantiate future claims, but concise enough to maintain consistency. Focus on events that could trigger compensation events, affect the critical path, or create commercial risk. A 15-minute daily entry capturing key events is far more valuable than sporadic hour-long entries that get skipped when site teams are busy.

What if we discover a compensation event weeks after it occurred?

NEC4 clause 61.3 requires notification within 8 weeks of becoming aware of the event. Even if you discover it late, contemporaneous records from the period when the event occurred strengthen your claim. Document when and how you discovered the event, then work backwards through your records to establish its original impact.

Can we use AI or automation to improve record-keeping?

Absolutely. Modern AI-powered tools can analyse site diaries to identify potential compensation events, suggest relevant NEC4 clause references, and prompt timely notice issuance. However, human judgement remains essential—AI can flag opportunities but can't replace the contextual understanding that site managers bring to record-keeping.

How long should we retain contemporaneous records?

Under UK construction law, retain all project records for at least 6 years after practical completion (12 years for contracts executed as deeds). For high-value or complex projects, retain records longer. Cloud storage makes this practical—there's no good reason to delete records that could protect you in future disputes.

What if the PM disputes our contemporaneous records?

This is where systematic, consistent record-keeping pays off. If you've maintained daily site diaries throughout the project, with consistent format and detail level, it's difficult for opposing parties to credibly dispute specific entries. Courts and adjudicators give significant weight to contemporaneous records that form part of an established, routine documentation system rather than isolated entries created to support specific claims.

The Bottom Line

The construction industry has a saying: "if it's not documented, it didn't happen." In the context of NEC4 contracts and commercial claims, that saying should be refined: "if it wasn't documented contemporaneously, you can't prove it happened—and if you can't prove it, you won't get paid."

Effective contemporaneous record-keeping isn't about creating more paperwork or drowning site teams in administrative burden. It's about establishing clear, consistent workflows that capture the right information at the right time, connecting daily observations to formal processes, and creating an audit trail that protects your commercial position.

The contractors who excel at this don't necessarily work on less complex projects or encounter fewer compensation events. They simply recognise that documentation is part of the job, not an administrative afterthought. By building record-keeping into daily routines and leveraging tools that make it efficient, they ensure they're paid fairly for every variation, delay, and scope change they encounter.

In an industry where margins are tight and disputes are costly, contemporaneous records represent the difference between profit and loss, successful claims and rejected submissions, strong client relationships and protracted arguments. The question isn't whether you can afford to implement better record-keeping—it's whether you can afford not to.

Ready to streamline your site records? Gather combines site diaries, compensation event detection, and NEC4 compliance in one platform. Book a demo to see how AI-powered site records can protect your commercial position.