RDI

RDI workflow

Variation & Scope Change Claim Validation

cloud recordings, 360° captures, and Gate Report data are used to verify what work was or was not performed — enabling validation or refutation of a variation order claim.

Category
Claims, Disputes & Legal Evidence
Frequency
Very Common
Confidence
High
Evidence records
25
Cost model
Qualitative

Trigger, activity, conclusion

01 · Trigger

A subcontractor submits a variation order or change claim for additional work — or a scope dispute arises during a meeting when a party alleges work was done (or not done).

02 · Activity

Retrieving and reviewing historical preserved footage to establish a factual visual record of what work was performed, when, and by whom.

03 · Conclusion

The variation claim is resolved using visual evidence — either validated, reduced, or withdrawn. Formal adjudication avoided.

Workflow steps

  1. Step 01

    A variation order claim or scope dispute is raised — subcontractor submits a VO claim, main contractor raises a VO to the client, or a scope dispute surfaces during a meeting.

    Inferred
  2. Step 02

    QS or PM reviews the claim and identifies the time period, location, and nature of the alleged change or additional work.

    Inferred
  3. Step 03

    PM or site manager accesses the evidence system and navigates to the relevant date/time window and camera(s).

    Evidenced
  4. Step 04

    Footage reviewed to determine what work was performed, which trades were present, and whether scope deviates from the original contract.

    Evidenced
  5. Step 05

    Where the dispute concerns quantities, Gate Report data cross-referenced to verify truck movements, delivery counts, and timing.

    Inferred
  6. Step 06

    Where the dispute concerns installation completeness, 360° captures from the relevant period reviewed to provide element-level visual confirmation.

    Evidenced
  7. Step 07

    Relevant footage clips, 360° frame exports, or Gate Report data extracts compiled as evidence.

    Evidenced
  8. Step 08

    Evidence presented to the disputing party — subcontractor, client, or their respective QS teams.

    Evidenced
  9. Step 09

    Disputing party reviews visual evidence and either withdraws, adjusts, or maintains their claim.

    Inferred
  10. Step 10

    If claim is maintained despite footage evidence, package escalated to formal dispute resolution — but in the majority of evidenced cases, footage resolves the dispute before this stage.

    Inferred
  11. Step 11

    Variation order settled — approved, adjusted, or closed — and project cost plan updated accordingly.

    Inferred

Evidence records

Main contractor used cloud recordings to verify the extent of groundworks completed by a subcontractor in a disputed earthworks variation claim — footage confirmed the excavation depth claimed was not reached, reducing the VO value by approximately 30%.
Anonymized evidence record 17.1
Aidan was able to pull out his phone, open 360 view on the mobile app and show that the works had already been done. This saved time and reduced the need for written documentation.
Anonymized evidence record 17.2
QS used the evidence system recordings to verify that a subcontractor's claimed additional works (temporary protection installation) were actually within the original contract scope — saving the main contractor from approving an unjustified variation order.
Anonymized evidence record 17.3

ROI model

Template E

dispute claims

Evercam provides visual evidence that resolves or prevents disputes with subcontractors, suppliers, and clients. Saving from faster resolution, avoided escalation, and prevented overcharges.

Formula

saving = (disputes_avoided_pct × disputes_per_year × avg_resolution_cost) + (overcharges_prevented_per_year × avg_overcharge_value)