Claims adjusters and brokers face a recurring challenge in construction claims: moving from competing opinions to defensible facts, fast. A forensic building consultant for construction dispute resolution equips decision makers with tested evidence, clear scopes and code references that stand up in negotiations or at hearing. MBC delivers this service nationally with independent, insurer grade reporting built for claims environments.
In Australia, the Insurance Council of Australia’s General Insurance Code of Practice sets expectations for fairness, timeliness and transparency in claims, which makes reliable technical evidence central to dispute reduction.
Forensic building consultant: scope and triggers
A forensic building consultant investigates causation, compliance and rectification so that policy response can be separated from maintenance or workmanship issues. Typical triggers include conflicting builder opinions, repeated leaks or movement, disputed variations, systemic defects in multi‑unit buildings and high‑value repairs where apportionment matters.
Our insurer grade building reports provide event versus pre‑existing analysis, quantified scopes and costings that are ready for settlement or tender.
Public scrutiny of defects keeps pressure on outcomes, with ABC News reporting on persistent apartment defects in Sydney that leave owners and insurers navigating complex responsibilities.
How insurers use expert evidence in construction dispute resolution
Commissioned correctly, expert evidence narrows issues and reduces escalation. The Insurance Council of Australia’s Expert Report Best Practice Standard outlines how insurers should brief independent experts, frame questions and manage conflicts to improve transparency.
Where litigation becomes likely, experts must comply with court rules and keep their duty to the tribunal paramount. MBC reports are prepared by licensed consultants and registered engineers who work to these standards and record assumptions, evidence and methods so conclusions are testable.
NCC compliance that shapes construction dispute resolution
Disputes often turn on whether work meets the National Construction Code. Our findings reference Deemed‑to‑Satisfy provisions, Performance Requirements and acceptable Assessment Methods so recommendations are anchored to the NCC rather than opinion. We explain what failed, why it mattered for safety or amenity, and how rectification meets compliance pathways, which improves acceptance across all parties.
Tips adjusters use to reduce construction disputes
- Commission early evidence that answers causation, such as moisture profiles, level surveys or intrusive checks through our site investigation services.
- Ask for decision‑ready deliverables: event versus condition, NCC references, quantified scope and cost apportionment.
- Align language to policy: define sudden and accidental damage versus progressive failure with time‑stamped observations.
- Anticipate escalation: ensure chain‑of‑custody for samples, photo logs and contemporaneous notes suitable for expert witness use.
- Prioritise claims where evidence gaps drive variance, such as multi‑lot defects or repeat failures after weather events using the ICA catastrophe data hub to inform surge triage.
Case study: storm entry versus membrane failure
After a severe coastal storm, ceiling staining appeared across several strata lots. Two contractor quotes conflicted on cause and cost. MBC conducted invasive testing at selected locations, humidity mapping and drone imaging, then compared results with as‑built details and NCC waterproofing requirements. The analysis identified wind‑driven rain through displaced flashings as event related, while brittle membrane failure had allowed long‑term seepage elsewhere. Our report separated event damage from pre‑existing defects, set out a rectification scope with quantities, and apportioned costs so the insurer could settle storm items while the owners corporation progressed remedial works for the membrane. Cycle time shortened and objections fell away once the evidence trail was visible.
Why partner with Morse Building Consultancy
MBC is an independent, national team of licensed building consultants and registered engineers that produces factual, defensible reporting for insurers and adjusters, as outlined on our About us page. Our methodology is consistent across states and backed by decades of experience in the insurance sector, which means your file receives the same structured approach from site visit to quantified scope.
- Consistent evidence pathway from triage to expert witness, improving settlement quality and reducing leakage.
- National mobilisation with insurer grade reporting that references the NCC and separates event damage from condition.
Ready to progress a complex file or close variance on a disputed scope? Contact us and brief a claim.