Claim preparation: assemble a packet and hear what a reviewer asks

Pick the evidence, do the arithmetic, and a reviewer walks the packet naming what is missing, what does not agree with something else in it, and what a real one would ask next. There is no mark at the end, because a reviewer does not give one.

Live result

The claim comes to $5,850 and the arithmetic behind it is correct, which is not the same as proved.

Containers6
Chargeable days49

As it stands, the discharge date is asserted and the document a reviewer would read to test it is missing.

Assemble the packet

Try a packet

What goes in the packet

Counting conventions

These controls change what is asked, not what is counted.

Free time is counted in

The clock starts at

The container returned inside free time

Who checked this packet

The transport originals

The arithmetic

Container 1 · 19 days · in dollars:

7\times95 + 5\times145=1{,}390

Container 2 · 19 days · in dollars:

7\times95 + 5\times145=1{,}390

Container 3 · 13 days · in dollars:

6\times95=570

Container 4 · 24 days · in dollars:

7\times95 + 7\times145 + 3\times210=2{,}310

Container 5 · 9 days · in dollars:

2\times95=190

Container 6 · 7 days · inside free time in dollars:

C=0.00

Total · 49 chargeable days · $5,850

What a reviewer asks

A reviewer does not mark a claim. They read it, and where it does not answer a question they ask the question. These are the questions this packet raises as it stands.

missing

The count runs from discharge. Nothing in the packet establishes the discharge date it runs from.

missing

The packet shows the containers were held. It does not show what held them, or who is answerable for it.

missing

Seven days of free time are deducted before the first chargeable day. The packet does not carry the term that grants them.

missing

2 deadlines are named in this claim and the document that sets them is not in the packet. A reviewer asked where the period comes from and the packet answered with the period.

does not agree

One container shows no chargeable days and still appears in the claim. A reviewer reads the two lines together and asks which of them is wrong.

does not agree

Storage and detention are claimed over the same days on the same containers. A reviewer asks which cost sits in which head, and a percentage taken off will not answer it.

does not agree

The packet was checked by the person who assembled it. A reviewer reads for what is absent, and absence is the one thing the person who chose what to include cannot see.

asks

This counts from discharge. A reviewer asks which event the contract's own clock starts at, and the packet does not say either way.

asks

The claim comes to $5,850. A reviewer asks which single document in the packet they would read first to test that figure, and reads that one before any other.

The last two are asked of every packet, including a complete one, which is why this list never empties.

What the days cost

The containers

Containers	6
Chargeable days	49
Days inside free time	39
The claim	$5,850
The largest single container	$2,310, on 17 chargeable days

What a reviewer reads for each figure

Four figures, and each one is tested against a different document. The days come from the gate records, not from the count. The rate comes from the tariff, not from the invoice that applied it. The cause comes from the correspondence, and it is the figure with no arithmetic at all behind it, which is why it is the one most often left out. The amount comes from the other three, and a reviewer who cannot get to it through them will not accept it because it adds up.

Who is holding the originals

Document	Original or copy	Who is holding it	Has it moved
The transport document set, three originals	Original	Held by the bank against the credit	No
The signed delivery notes	Original	Held by the party making the claim	No
The tariff schedule	Copy	Downloaded from the terminal	No

Every deadline, with its four questions

Notice that the containers were held

Where it comes from: The clause the contract gives for notice
Who owes it: The party making the claim
What happens if it passes: Named in the same clause, and it is not always the loss of the claim
Can it move: Whether it can move is a question about the clause, not about the facts

Particulars of what is claimed

Where it comes from: The same clause, or the one after it
Who owes it: The party making the claim
What happens if it passes: Usually a right to ask for them again rather than a bar
Can it move: Often extended in practice, and practice is not the clause

The terminal's own window for a charge query

Where it comes from: The terminal's published tariff
Who owes it: Whoever was billed
What happens if it passes: The query stops being available, and the invoice stands
Can it move: A commercial question for the terminal, not a contractual one

Deadline	Where it comes from	Who owes it	What happens if it passes	Can it move
Notice that the containers were held	The clause the contract gives for notice	The party making the claim	Named in the same clause, and it is not always the loss of the claim	Whether it can move is a question about the clause, not about the facts
Particulars of what is claimed	The same clause, or the one after it	The party making the claim	Usually a right to ask for them again rather than a bar	Often extended in practice, and practice is not the clause
The terminal's own window for a charge query	The terminal's published tariff	Whoever was billed	The query stops being available, and the invoice stands	A commercial question for the terminal, not a contractual one

None of these is drawn as a countdown, and none of them has a date on it here. The scenario has no calendar, and a reviewer's first question about a date is never how many days are left.

What this page does not decide

Everything here is synthetic. The claim, containers, tariff and packet are invented. This page does not assess entitlement, decide whether an event is compensable, award time, state what is recoverable, or accept any detail from a real claim.

It describes the arithmetic in one invented packet and the questions that packet raises. The contract and the facts that would decide a real claim are outside this page.

How the claim is built

Model version: 1.0

The formula, in words

Free time comes off first, and it is a threshold rather than a discount. A container returned inside it costs nothing, and the first chargeable day is the day after it ends.
The tariff is a ladder, so cost does not track time. Each tier applies only to the days inside it, which is why a container held a quarter longer than another can cost two thirds more.
The count and the proof are separate. Every figure here can be computed from four numbers, and none of them can be tested without a document, which is the difference between a claim that is right and a claim that can be read.

d=\max(0,h-7)

where $d$ is the chargeable days and $h$ the days held.

C=\sum_{i=1}^{d}r_i

where $C$ is the container cost, $i$ the chargeable day index, and $r_i$ the rate for that day at its tier.

A worked example

Free time 7 days, so a container held 19 days has 12 chargeable days, being days 8 to 19. Days 8 to 14 are seven days at $95, which is $665. Days 15 to 19 are five days at $145, which is $725. That container is $1,390.

Container	1	2	3	4	5	6	Total
Days held	19	19	13	24	9	7
Chargeable	12	12	6	17	2	0	49
Tier split	$7 \times 95$ , $5 \times 145$	$7 \times 95$ , $5 \times 145$	$6 \times 95$	$7 \times 95$ , $7 \times 145$ , $3 \times 210$	$2 \times 95$	none
Cost	$1,390	$1,390	$570	$2,310	$190	$0	$5,850

The check. 49 chargeable days across six containers, and 39 days sat inside free time and cost nothing. The tariff line is $0 at day 7, $665 at day 14, $1,680 at day 21 and $3,570 at day 30, so the ladder is not linear and a container held a third longer than another does not cost a third more: container 4 was held 26% longer than containers 1 and 2 and cost 66% more.

The line that changes no total. Container 6 adds $0 to the claim and is the second thing a reviewer notices, because a claim carrying a line worth nothing invites the question of what else is in it that was not checked. Removing it moves the total not at all and removes a challenge, which is the cleanest demonstration on the page that the packet and the arithmetic are separate problems.

What this does not model

Entitlement of any kind, the contract that would decide it, notice, liability, mitigation, whether the hold was anyone's fault, currency and exchange, interest, set-off, limitation, the terminal's own charges, and every question a reviewer would ask that is not one of the twelve in the reviewer script. This page models five things a reviewer reads for. A reviewer reads for more than five things.

The whole record prints. Your browser can save it as a PDF instead of printing it.

The evidence discipline is described with reference to the Society of Construction Law Delay and Disruption Protocol and AACE delay analysis guidance, and no definition from either is reproduced. These sources are commentary and protocols rather than the contract for any claim. This page does not state what a reviewer must do, only what one would ask of this invented packet, and it does not decide entitlement, liability, recoverability or amount.

Claim preparation: assemble a packet and hear what a reviewer asks

Packet checklist

Item-by-item: Present · Gate-out records for each containerPresent · The tariff schedule relied onAbsent · The transport document showing dischargeAbsent · Correspondence identifying what held themAbsent · The clause creating the free-time periodPresent · A storage invoice covering the same daysAbsent · A written estimate of the delayAbsent · Dated photographs at the terminal

Counting conventions

Current choices: Free time: Calendar daysClock starts: DischargeZero-value line: Claim it anywayChecked by: The person who prepared it

Every deadline and its four questions

Deadlines: Notice that the containers were held Where from: The clause the contract gives for notice Who owes it: The party making the claim If it passes: Named in the same clause, and it is not always the loss of the claim Can it move: Whether it can move is a question about the clause, not about the facts
Particulars of what is claimed Where from: The same clause, or the one after it Who owes it: The party making the claim If it passes: Usually a right to ask for them again rather than a bar Can it move: Often extended in practice, and practice is not the clause
The terminal's own window for a charge query Where from: The terminal's published tariff Who owes it: Whoever was billed If it passes: The query stops being available, and the invoice stands Can it move: A commercial question for the terminal, not a contractual one

Notice that the containers were held	Where from: The clause the contract gives for notice	Who owes it: The party making the claim	If it passes: Named in the same clause, and it is not always the loss of the claim	Can it move: Whether it can move is a question about the clause, not about the facts
Particulars of what is claimed	Where from: The same clause, or the one after it	Who owes it: The party making the claim	If it passes: Usually a right to ask for them again rather than a bar	Can it move: Often extended in practice, and practice is not the clause
The terminal's own window for a charge query	Where from: The terminal's published tariff	Who owes it: Whoever was billed	If it passes: The query stops being available, and the invoice stands	Can it move: A commercial question for the terminal, not a contractual one

Originals custody

Custody ledger: The transport document set, three originals Original · Held by the bank against the credit · Moved: No
The signed delivery notes Original · Held by the party making the claim · Moved: No
The tariff schedule Copy · Downloaded from the terminal · Moved: No

The transport document set, three originals	Original · Held by the bank against the credit · Moved: No
The signed delivery notes	Original · Held by the party making the claim · Moved: No
The tariff schedule	Copy · Downloaded from the terminal · Moved: No

Reviewer work list

Questions and notes: missing: The count runs from discharge. Nothing in the packet establishes the discharge date it runs from.missing: The packet shows the containers were held. It does not show what held them, or who is answerable for it.missing: Seven days of free time are deducted before the first chargeable day. The packet does not carry the term that grants them.missing: 2 deadlines are named in this claim and the document that sets them is not in the packet. A reviewer asked where the period comes from and the packet answered with the period.does not agree: One container shows no chargeable days and still appears in the claim. A reviewer reads the two lines together and asks which of them is wrong.does not agree: Storage and detention are claimed over the same days on the same containers. A reviewer asks which cost sits in which head, and a percentage taken off will not answer it.does not agree: The packet was checked by the person who assembled it. A reviewer reads for what is absent, and absence is the one thing the person who chose what to include cannot see.asks: This counts from discharge. A reviewer asks which event the contract's own clock starts at, and the packet does not say either way.asks: The claim comes to $5,850. A reviewer asks which single document in the packet they would read first to test that figure, and reads that one before any other.

Assemble the packet

What goes in the packet

Counting conventions

The arithmetic

What a reviewer asks

What the days cost

The containers

What a reviewer reads for each figure

Who is holding the originals

Every deadline, with its four questions

Notice that the containers were held

Particulars of what is claimed

The terminal's own window for a charge query

What this page does not decide

How the claim is built

The formula, in words

A worked example

What this does not model

Related

Packet checklist

Counting conventions

Every deadline and its four questions

Originals custody

Reviewer work list