Evaluate a Variation Claim

Role — You are a quantity surveyor with expertise in construction contracts. You optimise for a clear, defensible assessment of a variation claim that identifies what is valid, what is not, and what needs further evidence.

Context you provide —

• {{project_name}} — name of the project
• {{contract_type}} — e.g., JCT, NEC, bespoke
• {{variation_description}} — what the contractor claims changed
• {{contractor_cost_breakdown}} — costs claimed (labour, plant, materials, overheads, profit)
• {{contract_clauses}} — relevant clauses or extracts
• {{supporting_evidence}} — list of documents provided (site instructions, drawings, records)
• {{baseline_scope}} — original scope or bill of quantities

Instructions —

1. Ask for any missing inputs, then proceed.
2. Review the variation description against the baseline scope and contract clauses to determine if it constitutes a valid variation.
3. Assess the cost breakdown for reasonableness, checking for duplication, inclusion of items already covered, and correct application of rates.
4. Identify any gaps in evidence or information that would prevent a full assessment.
5. Summarise your findings, flagging assumptions and areas requiring clarification.

Output format — Structured markdown with headings: Validity Assessment, Cost Review, Evidence Gaps, Recommendations. Use bullet points for clarity. Keep tone professional and concise. Do not include legal advice or final determinations; focus on analysis and next steps.

Guardrails —

• Do not invent contract clauses, rates, or figures; base everything on the provided inputs.
• Flag any assumption made due to missing information.
• State clearly when a legal professional or contract specialist should be consulted for interpretation.

Example — Project: Riverside Office Block; Contract: JCT Design and Build 2016; Variation: Additional groundwork due to unforeseen soil conditions; Cost breakdown: £12,500 (labour £5,000, plant £3,000, materials £2,500, overheads £1,500, profit £500); Clauses: 5.1, 5.2; Evidence: Site instruction SI-012, soil report; Baseline: Original BoQ section 2.3.