Evidence
Client stories from the cost file
Specific engagements, constraints, and outcomes — not star widgets.
They caught a façade provisional sum that would have looked fine in the tender total and disastrous six months later. The note was blunt; that helped.
The monthly verification memos arrived before certification, which is the only timing that matters. We still argued one retention line — but at least the arithmetic was clean.
On the variation batch, three high-value items had measurement that could not be rebuilt from the file. ArchITechNet did not inflate drama; they simply refused to recommend approval until the take-off existed.
I wished we had called them earlier in the structure package — by final account the open items were fewer, but the paperwork archaeology took longer than I expected. The settlement briefing still saved us from signing a foggy number.
Extended story — mid-rise mixed use, Xitun
An owner’s team brought ArchITechNet in during month four of construction, after progress claims began to outpace the site photographs. The flagship cost audit coordination mapped the priced bill against the current drawing issue, then sampled three months of claims.
Two mechanical plant items were claimed ahead of installation; one façade variation lacked an instruction date. The open-item register became the standing agenda for the fortnightly cost meeting. The owner kept their existing QS; we stayed in the audit lane.
Discuss a similar engagement
If your project is entering a messy cost phase, send the stage and the documents you can share. We will say quickly whether an audit is the right next step.
Request an audit