My co-founder and I spent the last few months talking to contractors, project managers, claims consultants, and in-house counsel. We repeatedly asked them “what’s broken?” Two patterns kept showing up in almost every conversation.

The first is the “let’s not rock the boat” mindset. Some contractors avoid formal claim notices and written records because they don’t want to damage the relationship with their client or partner.

When scope shifts, approvals delay, or designs are wrong, contractors are typically entitled to additional time or money. But recovery requires a causal story: what happened, when, how it impacted schedule and cost, submitted within strict notice windows (often 28 days or less).

We spoke with a subcontractor who learned the hard way and lost his business. They relied on verbal assurances from the prime contractor and proceeded with extra work without approved change orders or formal notices. When payment disputes arose later, they had no contractual record to prove entitlement. Without notices and documentation, none of the work they did mattered.

Lesson 1: informal assurances don’t override contract clauses. If you fail to document and notify per contract, you’re at the mercy of the other party’s goodwill, which can evaporate overnight.

The second is poor and scattered documentation. Teams document constantly but none of it is organized to prove anything when it matters.

Arcadis’s annual Construction Disputes Report found that the number-one cause of disputes in recent years is “poorly drafted or incomplete and unsubstantiated claims”. It's not hard to see why. Our industry is fragmented in every aspect, including the tech stack. A recent Deloitte survey found a median of 11 separate data environments per contractor in 2025. Basically, drawings in one system, schedules in another, RFIs and submittals in a PM software, emails in Outlook, cost reports in Excel, daily reports in a different tool…

Lesson 2: evidence scattered across 11 systems isn't evidence. It's a scavenger hunt you'll run out of time to finish, and a multi-million dollar reconstruction effort when disputes go legal.

These two habits feed each other. And together, they are the reason contractors leave millions on the table every year in unrecovered claims.

By the time your contracts or legal team needs to reconstruct the story, you are spending weeks looking for evidence instead of running your project. And even when you’re right, you settle for less than you’re owed because proving it requires a level of analysis (e.g. time impact, cost impact analysis) nobody has time for or expertise that requires expensive claims consultants.

That era should be over. Contractors should be able to identify potential claim events as they emerge, link them to contract clauses and root causes, and automatically build chronological evidence trails. When a delay occurs or scope shifts, teams should be able to simulate schedule and cost impacts immediately. Claims should be a byproduct of running the job properly, not a separate exercise that requires weeks of reconstruction and outside consultants.

We've built the system to make it happen. If this resonates, we’d love to talk.