Insurers and counsel
Trenchless disputes turn on a small, technical evidential record that very few people can read — and on the question of what a competent contractor should have done with what was in front of them.
Why this work suits us
- We have drilled several thousand bores, so we can say what is normal, what is marginal and what nobody competent would have done.
- We can read the primary evidence directly — bore logs, pressure data, calibration records, fluid reconciliations, ITPs and locate packages — rather than relying on the parties' narratives.
- We have no construction interest anywhere in the sector and take no work from contractors on matters we are instructed on. Our position →
- We accept no contingent or outcome-dependent fee.
Matters we are instructed on
Inadvertent returns
Environmental release to a watercourse or to surface: foreseeability, whether the envelope was computed and monitored, whether the response was followed.
Damage to third-party facilities
Strikes on live lines and cables: the locate package, separation design, ground-disturbance classification and what the bore log shows.
Lost and abandoned bores
Causation between ground, method, equipment and decision-making, and whether abandonment was reasonable and timely.
Differing site conditions
What the tender disclosed, what was encountered, and what a competent contractor should have allowed for.
Delay and productivity
Planned against achieved progress, and the attribution between ground, method, equipment and plan.
Defects and turnover
Whether the installation met the code, the design and the inspection plan — and what the records do and do not establish.
How we are instructed
Conflict check
Against the parties and the project, before we see anything privileged. Same day, usually within the hour.
Preliminary view
A short, privileged assessment of the technical merits on the documents available — deliberately before anyone commits to a position.
Full review
The complete record, with a schedule of what is missing and what should be requested on disclosure.
Report and evidence
A report in the form your jurisdiction requires, then experts' meetings, joint statements and attendance to give evidence.
An expert's duty runs to the tribunal, not to the instructing party. We will tell you early and in private if the record does not support your client's position, and we will not write an opinion we would not defend under cross-examination. That is, in the end, the only thing that makes the opinion worth having.