People & Services

Delay Analysis

David Halford photo

David Halford
BSc, MRICS

Managing Director

Office: +44 (0)20 3355 7074
Mobile: +44 (0)7946 654 293
Email: David@tqef.uk.com
Download CV: Click here

Overview

David is co-founder of TQEF and heads up the firm’s delay and programming expert witness capabilities.  He has 30 years’ experience in the construction industry and 20 years’ specialised experience in forensic planning and delay analysis.  He is a highly experienced and well regarded delay and programming expert.

David has prepared expert reports and provided oral evidence on delay on a wide range of project types, including major housing and infrastructure developments, wastewater-to-energy power plants, offshore oil (FPSO vessels and drillship reactivation), roads, pipeline projects, data centres, hotels, universities, research facilities, leisure & convention centres, commercial and residential projects, both in the UK domestic market and internationally, including South America, South Africa, South Korea, Libya, Germany, Romania and North Macedonia.

Background and experience

David qualified as a Chartered Quantity Surveyor in 1997 at Davis Langdon & Everest. In 2001, David moved into the field of dispute related consultancy in Davis Langdon’s Legal Support Services Group where he focused on quantum analysis before then specialising in forensic delay analysis in 2005. He became a Partner at Davis Langdon in 2009. In 2012, David co-founded TQEF.

David has undertaken detailed forensic analysis of the nature, cause and extent of delay and disruption on a wide range of construction and engineering projects, including:

  • Wastewater-to-energy plants
  • Hydro-electric power plants
  • Coal fired power stations
  • Biomass power plants
  • Decommissioning of nuclear power plants
  • Crude oil pipelines
  • Offshore oil (FPSO vessels and FPU platforms)
  • Drillship preservation, maintenance and reactivation
  • Low density ammonium nitrate production facilities
  • Pharmaceutical and medical facilities
  • Process engineering
  • Sea Terminals
  • Roads and bridges
  • Overground and underground rail
  • Airports
  • Leisure Centres
  • Residential developments and high‐end residential dwellings
  • Museums
  • Hotels
  • Commercial developments
  • Colleges and Universities

David’s approach to undertaking delay analysis

David has extensive experience acting on behalf of employer and contractor bodies in both international and UK domestic markets. He has a sound understanding of all major retrospective and prospective methods of delay analysis and the ability to apply them in a robust and effective manner in order to establish and analyse the nature, cause and extent of critical and non-critical path delays to projects. This may involve complex analysis of electronic programming data (using programming software including Primavera and Asta PowerProject) or simply a careful review and presentation of the facts in a logical and objective manner.

Regardless of the size and complexity of the project in dispute David recognises that it is essential for any analysis to be based firmly on a careful and thorough review of the facts, evidenced by contemporaneous records, and to set out the findings of the analysis in clear and concise written reports (in the context of both advisory reports to clients and expert reports served in Arbitral Tribunals and other examining bodies).

 


BACK TO DELAY TEAM PROFILES
“I agree entirely with Mr Halford. None of [the Employer’s consultant’s] evidence meets this criteria…I have struggled with [the Employer’s consultant’s] evidence and the reason for that is well illustrated by Mr Halford’s report, which comprehensively identifies all the lack of detail and supporting evidence” [Adjudicator’s Decision].
“Based on Mr Halford’s analysis, which I accept, there was no critical delay caused by the delayed installation of the roof steelwork to [a specific building], let alone the Project” [Adjudicator’s Decision].
“…my view is that [the contractor] has failed to demonstrate that critical delay was caused as a result of [two specific delay events] for the reasons given by Mr Halford in his report” [Adjudicator’s Decision].
“The Tribunal finds that the Halford analysis is the best method of analyzing delay on this project considering all the factors that go into selecting a methodology, e.g., available schedules.” [Tribunal’s Award]
“We appreciate your assistance in the matter. It was a pleasure working with you.”