Handover Documentation Dispute
You complete a bathroom refurbishment including new sanitary pipework, a replaced sub-distribution board and a new extract fan. At handover the client signs the acceptance protocol but complains that the documentation folder is thin: it contains a supplier data sheet for the fan, an invoice copy, and a hand-drawn sketch of the pipe route. No pressure test record, no insulation resistance or continuity results, no declaration for the electrical work, and no operating instructions. Eight months later a leak occurs at a concealed joint; the client claims you cannot prove the joint was tested and demands you open the wall at your own cost. Your firm's standard is to keep test records for the statutory retention period.
1. Identify the documentation gaps and explain how each gap affects your position in the dispute.
Read the worked answer
Gaps and consequences:
Pressure test record for the sanitary pipework: without a dated record showing test pressure, duration and result, you cannot prove the concealed joint was sound at handover. This is the most damaging gap, because the defect is at exactly the point that should have been tested.
Electrical test results (continuity, insulation resistance, RCD trip times) and the declaration of conformity for the new sub-board and fan: these are required for the electrical installation and their absence suggests the work was not verified. It also undermines your credibility on the plumbing point.
As-built drawing: a hand sketch is weak evidence of the installed route and hinders later fault-finding.
Operating and maintenance instructions: the client can argue they were not informed about maintenance, which matters for any wear-related damage.
Acceptance protocol content: the signature proves acceptance but does not replace technical evidence. A protocol listing the documents handed over would have exposed the gaps at the time.
Net effect: the burden of proving the work was correct shifts toward you. Expect to bear the cost of opening and inspecting, though not necessarily of repairing a defect caused by later damage.
2. Propose a documentation checklist you will use at every future handover, and explain how it would have changed this outcome.
Read the worked answer
Checklist: (a) dated pressure test record with test pressure, duration, result and signature; (b) electrical test protocol with continuity, insulation resistance, RCD trip times and tester serial number; (c) declaration of conformity and, where required, notification to the network operator; (d) as-built drawing to scale with concealed routes dimensioned; (e) manufacturer documents and operating instructions for every installed appliance; (f) maintenance schedule and warranty terms; (g) acceptance protocol that lists each document by name and is signed only when all are attached; (h) archive copy retained for the statutory period.
Effect on this case: the pressure test record would have shown whether the joint passed, allowing a factual rather than a credibility-based argument. The as-built drawing would have located the joint without exploratory opening. The itemised acceptance protocol would have prevented handover with an incomplete folder, or at least recorded that the client accepted it knowingly. The archive copy would still be available eight months later.
Process change: no final invoice until the checklist is complete, and a second person spot-checks the folder before the handover meeting.