The main recurring issue in construction negligence cases is a lack of documentation during the early litigation or claim evaluation phase. Proper documentation is not just helpful; it is essential. The moment to start gathering documents is the moment you receive a claim or become aware of a potential claim. Delays in gathering documentation or inspecting the property can significantly increase exposure, limit available defenses and make the claim much more costly and difficult to resolve. Acting quickly and strategically can make all the difference.
Obviously, contracts, change orders, updated plans and specifications, permit applications and approvals should be requested and reviewed immediately. These items help clarify expectations, timelines, responsibilities and form the backbone of most litigation. The importance of collecting these items is self-evident and most contractors keep them on file. However, equally important and often overlooked are informal communications.
Informal communications (e.g., text messages and emails) often contain discussions about changes to scope, delays, concerns raised by either party or changes/agreements made on the fly. It is not uncommon for project changes to be discussed via text or email without executing a formal, signed change order. Frequently, owners or contractors will misremember the nature of conversations over time. Verbal discussions about minor requests or a quick favor often evolve into very different recollections months or years later. What one party viewed as a courtesy can later be described as an agreement to perform additional work within the contractual scope of work. Without contemporaneous documentation to fill in the factual gaps (such as an email or text message detailing the discussion), the dispute becomes a battle over credibility.
In those situations, the parties and their lawyers are left debating seemingly straightforward questions, such as whether the contractor failed to complete the agreed-upon work or whether the change in scope constituted a new contract or merely an amendment to the original contract. In these disputes, those informal messages can carry real weight but are often not collected until well after a lawsuit commences. The sooner you collect this information, the better positioned you will be to understand what really happened, evaluate any potential liability, and avoid paying attorney fees on what should be an easy or straightforward defense.
INSPECTIONS AND EVIDENCE
Another common issue is the lack of timely inspections. Scheduling an inspection of the property should be one of your first tasks once a claim or potential claim is identified, preferably with the contractor or construction expert present. It is even more crucial for time-sensitive issues like water intrusion. Mold or other deterioration can occur quickly and, if not documented promptly, it will be difficult to determine the property’s condition at the time of the claim. Claimants often fail to mitigate their own damages and end up worsening their alleged damages by not taking the simplest of precautions, such as putting a tarp on a roof or using a dehumidifier. However, without clear evidence of the conditions at the time of the claim, it is significantly harder to establish that a claimant failed to mitigate damages. Getting a snapshot of the property’s condition at the time of the claim will preserve evidence critical to defenses such as failure to mitigate damages.
Early inspection also helps control costs. If damage is identified and documented promptly, repairs can often be made before the situation gets worse. For instance, what starts as a small leak could require only minor repairs if caught early but could turn into a major remediation project and lead to additional claims, such as mold, if it sits for weeks without attention. Getting an expert evaluation gives you a clearer picture of the actual cause and scope of the problem, helping you separate legitimate claims from inflated, unrelated or self-inflicted issues. Additionally, inspections help support the existing documentation you already have for the project. It is much more persuasive to present photos and daily reports combined with an independent inspection report than to present the contractor’s documents alone.
Photographs play a major role in construction litigation, and contractors should take as many photographs as possible (wide shots, close-ups, multiple angles and videos). Photos provide a baseline of what the property looked like at the time and prevent later assertions claiming the damage was more extensive than it really was. It also prevents a claimant from hiring another contractor to correct any allegedly negligent work and submitting additional claims, including unrelated or excessive charges. This could include improvements to allegedly damaged items (i.e., tile floors to marble floors or oak flooring to mahogany flooring) or the inclusion of items that were damaged before the original contractor began work. While it may be tedious to take and organize so many photos, these images will also help if the case goes to court or arbitration because visual evidence is far more persuasive and easier to comprehend than written reports. The old adage that a picture is worth a thousand words is never as true as in the courtroom.
PROPERLY DOCUMENT MINOR ISSUES
No construction project is ever flawless. Large, complex jobs involve countless decisions, adjustments and moving parts, and minor issues are inevitable, even when the work is performed competently and in accordance with the standard of care. The real danger is not the existence of those minor issues but the absence of contemporaneous records showing why something was or was not done.
When records are incomplete, routine construction realities can be recast as evidence of pervasive problems, especially as memories fade and narratives become more confident than accurate. Strong documentation keeps the focus on what truly happened and prevents a party with a questionable recollection of the facts from convincing others that their version of events is correct.
Although this discussion has focused primarily on documentation from the defense perspective, the same principles apply equally on the offensive side. Documents are just as critical to establishing liability and proving damages as they are to defending against them.
Most construction cases seem to come down to emails and documentation. Unless a contractor is clearly at fault, more often than not, the party with the better documentation ends up winning (or at least substantially limiting their exposure). It is much easier to litigate a case when you have all of the documents you need at the start. Documentation will not prevent every lawsuit, but in cases where liability is genuinely disputed or litigation is foreseeable, good documentation can dramatically narrow the issues, limit exposure and make resolution far easier.
SEE ALSO: AVALONBAY COMMUNITY’S EXPERIENCE WITH NEXT-GENERATION SITE DOCUMENTATION TECHNOLOGIES
