The eight checkpoints
1. The framework and its version. Which framework, which version, which date. Without that, no other check has a basis. This is covered in the article on the annual update.
2. The presence of descriptions. Does the bill circulate alone or with the specification. A bill without descriptions does not allow the scope of items to be determined.
3. The regime of each item. Provisional quantity, lump-sum quantity, global price or provisional item. The regime determines who bears quantity risk.
4. Consistency of units. Does each unit match the nature of the work described, and which measurement rule attaches to it.
5. Orders of magnitude. Relate the principal quantities to the area or volume of the project. An aberrant ratio reveals an entry or conversion error within minutes.
6. Orphan items and unpriced prescriptions. The cross-check of indexes, described in the article on matching specification and measurement.
7. Overlap zones. Junctions between trades, where duplicates and omissions lodge. They are read, not calculated.
8. Variants, options and stages. Are they separated with their own totals, or mixed into the base total.
The order matters
The eight points are not equal, and the order proposed is not arbitrary. It runs from the quickest check to the most demanding.
The first two are blocking. Without an identified framework and without descriptions, the six that follow rest on nothing.
Points three to five are quick and rewarding. They catch most gross anomalies for limited effort.
Points six to eight take time. They are indispensable on a substantial contract and can be abridged on a small one.
A check stopped after point five is better than no check. The mistake would be waiting until there is time for all of it.
| Check | What it catches | Effort |
|---|---|---|
| Index consistency | Items without prescription and the reverse | A few minutes |
| Arithmetic check | Calculation and carry-forward errors | A few minutes |
| Units and conventions | Developed or projected areas, linear metres | An hour |
| Comparison against ratios | Conspicuously low or high quantities | An hour |
| Search for missing items | Omissions not otherwise detectable | Several hours |
What to report and to whom
Three situations, three recipients.
An error or gap in the documents of a public contract is reported to the contracting authority, within the period set by the contract documents, in writing and keeping proof of sending. The stakes are covered in the article on who bears the risk of a quantity error.
An ambiguity about the scope of an item is resolved by a question, put through the channel provided. In public contracts, answers are generally published to all, preserving equal treatment.
An anomaly found by a client in their designer's bill is handled within the contractual relationship between them, and deserves to be put in writing.
How long it actually takes
An order of magnitude to gauge the effort. The full check is measured in hours rather than days.
On a typical building bill, points one to five take an experienced practitioner under an hour. Points six to eight take longer, depending on the size of the document.
That time compares with what it prevents: a discussion about the scope of an item during construction ties up several parties for days, and often ends in a costly compromise.
What not to do
Three reflexes to avoid.
Price first and check afterwards. Pricing locks in assumptions that will have to be reworked.
Correct silently. Changing a quantity in your own pricing without reporting it creates an invisible gap between the tender and the contract bill.
Assume others have checked. Neither the contracting authority nor the other tenderers guarantee detection of errors.
What this means for a professional
Three rules.
Do the first five points systematically, whatever the size of the contract.
Keep a record of the check, if only a list of the points verified and the anomalies found.
Report within the time limits, without waiting to finish the whole pricing exercise.
This article reflects professional practice at the date of checking and serves as orientation. It does not constitute legal advice and does not replace assessment of the individual case.