An EOT claim rises or falls on three things: whether the delay was excusable under the contract, whether it actually hit the critical path, and whether the number of days requested is backed by defensible schedule analysis. HADVEN LLC prepares EOT claims that establish all three, structured to the format and level of detail public owners, general contractors, and legal counsel expect to see.
Owners and agencies don't usually reject an EOT claim because the delay didn't happen. They reject it because the submission doesn't meet the agency's internal standard of proof — entitlement isn't tied to a specific contract clause, the delay isn't shown hitting the critical path, or the number of days requested is an estimate rather than the output of a defensible schedule analysis.
HADVEN LLC builds every EOT claim on the same well-maintained schedule record that supports our monthly updates and TIA work — so entitlement, causation, and quantum are all traceable back to contemporaneous project documentation, not reconstructed under deadline pressure after the fact.
Entitlement basis tied to a specific contract clause or excusable-delay provision, not a general narrative
Delay period identified and demonstrated against the critical path, not just a non-critical activity
Concurrent delay conditions identified and addressed directly, rather than left for the reviewer to find
Quantum of time requested supported by TIA or forensic schedule analysis, not an estimate
Structured for public owner review or legal proceedings, formatted to the standard the recipient expects
From initial entitlement review through submission-ready exhibits, HADVEN LLC supports every stage of an EOT claim.
Review of the contract's excusable-delay, force majeure, and change provisions to identify the specific clause basis a claim can be built on before any schedule work begins.
Determination of the specific period of delay attributable to the excusable event, tied to the schedule record rather than the broader duration of the disruption itself.
Identification and analysis of concurrent delay conditions, where owner-caused and contractor-caused delays overlap, a factor that directly affects how much time (and compensation, where applicable) a claim can support.
Time Impact Analysis or forensic schedule analysis prepared to quantify the exact number of days the claim requests, so the requested extension is a calculated output, not an estimate.
Assembly of the full EOT submission — entitlement narrative, delay analysis, schedule exhibits, and supporting documentation — formatted for the owner, agency, or legal reviewer.
Schedule-based exhibits and technical responses prepared to support negotiation with the owner or agency once a claim is submitted, including response to rejection comments.
The same disciplined sequence applies whether the claim is being prepared during the project or after closeout.
Contract clauses, correspondence, and the underlying event are reviewed to establish a specific, citable basis for the time extension.
The delay period is identified against the critical path, and any concurrent contractor-caused delay is isolated and addressed directly.
TIA or forensic schedule analysis quantifies the exact number of days the claim will request, tied to the project's own schedule data.
The completed claim package is submitted, with the underlying team available to respond to owner or agency questions through resolution.
A complete package your team, your owner, or your legal counsel can act on immediately.
Entitlement narrative citing the specific contract clause the claim is built on.
TIA or forensic exhibits quantifying the requested extension, with supporting schedule fragnets.
Concurrent delay analysis where overlapping causation applies, addressed directly rather than left open.
Agency-ready formatting matching the level of detail USACE, VA, Caltrans, or DOT reviewers expect.
Legal-review-ready documentation for counsel preparing negotiation, mediation, or arbitration.
A single point of contact through submission, negotiation, and resolution.
An Extension of Time claim is a formal contractual submission requesting additional contract time for owner-caused or excusable delay. It documents the entitlement basis, identifies the delay period, and includes the schedule analysis needed to support the requested time extension.
A Time Impact Analysis quantifies the schedule effect of one specific event, usually prepared close to when it happens. An Extension of Time claim is the broader contractual submission, often built on one or more TIAs, that formally requests additional contract time and establishes entitlement.
An EOT claim generally has to establish three things: that the delay was excusable under the contract, that it affected the critical path (not just a non-critical activity with available float), and that the requested number of days is supported by defensible schedule analysis rather than an estimate.
Yes. HADVEN LLC regularly prepares EOT claims and forensic delay analysis on schedules built by other parties, reconstructing the project record from daily reports, RFIs, and available update files where necessary.
Yes, where it applies. If contractor-caused and owner-caused delays overlap on the critical path during the same period, a defensible EOT claim needs to identify and address that concurrency, since it directly affects how much time extension (and, where relevant, compensation) the claim can support.
Contact HADVEN LLC to scope an EOT claim. We respond to all inquiries within one business day.
