Separate supported quantum from recovery

A head can be technically supported without its recovery being certain. Keep the arithmetic, records and conditional sum separate from sourced future expenditure, management effort, collection uncertainty and counterclaim or settlement effects. Describe the decision those facts support; do not replace them with a probability, rate or solvency opinion.

Updated: 16 September 2026. By Jack Butler-Kettle, Quantity Surveyor & Claims Consultant.

Why it matters

A head with clean arithmetic, full records and a sourced sum can still bring in less than it is worth, because the other side has a counterclaim, because the payer is slow, because the cost of running the argument eats the margin, or because the final figure is a negotiated one. If those factors are folded into the quantum as a discount, the supported sum disappears and nobody can see what the evidence actually shows. If they are turned into a probability or a solvency opinion, the surveyor has invented something the client will rely on. Kept on separate pages, the supported sum and the recovery facts each say what they can honestly say.

How to do it

Build the supported quantum for each head from the records, and state the sum the evidence carries.
On a separate page, list the recovery facts: counterclaims stated, settlement history, payment behaviour, fees still to be spent.
Describe what those facts suggest about the decision, in words, without a percentage or a rating.
Where future expenditure is claimed, source it separately and label it as such.
Present both pages together and let the decision maker weigh them.

Example

The situation

A subcontractor's surveyor has built a supported final account claim of £140,000. The main contractor has stated a defects counterclaim of £30,000, pays slowly and has offered £85,000. The director asks for one number to decide on.

What happens

The surveyor confirms the £140,000 as supported quantum on its own page, with the records referenced.
A second page lists the counterclaim as stated but unevidenced, the payment history of late but complete payments, and an estimate of £15,000 in fees to a decision.
The page describes what the facts support in words: a strong claim, a counterclaim that would need evidencing, and a payer that pays eventually.

The outcome

The director counters at £120,000 knowing the supported sum is £140,000 and why the offer sits below it, rather than being handed a discounted figure that hides both the strength of the claim and the reasons for settling.

Choosing the right stress test

More tips on the same part of the job.