Claims potential (German: Nachtragspotential or Nachtragspotenzial) is one of the most frequently overlooked topics in the construction tendering process. It's not about creative demands, but about legitimate compensation entitlements that are contractually and legally grounded — yet go unfiled due to time pressure, lack of systematic processes, or inadequate documentation. This guide explains what claims potential is, where it typically hides, how AI helps identify it, and what VOB/B regulations govern it.
What Exactly Is Claims Potential?
Claims potential refers to situations in construction and works contracts that can lead to legitimate supplementary claims. It arises whenever the work actually required differs from the contractually described scope. The reasons are diverse: gaps in the bill of quantities, contradictory specifications, changed quantities, or missing items. In German, both spellings — Nachtragspotential and Nachtragspotenzial — are correct and commonly used. The distinction is purely orthographic; there is no difference in meaning.
The 63% Reality: Why So Many Claims Are Lost
Industry studies and experience reports from the DACH construction sector consistently show that up to 63% of legitimate claims go unfiled. The reasons are structural. During the bidding phase, with typical deadlines of 2-3 weeks, there's hardly time for in-depth contract analysis. Estimating focuses on prices, not contract risks. Specification gaps, contradictory clauses, and implicit service requirements remain undetected. Only on-site — when work is already underway — do the discrepancies emerge. By then, the timely notices and comprehensive documentation required for successful claims enforcement are often missing. The consequence: construction companies perform work not covered by the contract without receiving additional compensation.
The 5 Most Common Sources of Claims Potential in Bills of Quantities
Claims potential hides in typical locations within the bill of quantities. Knowing these patterns enables targeted review. First: Lump-sum requirements — when services are described as lump sums ('all necessary work'), there's room for claims on work exceeding what could reasonably be expected. Second: Provisional items with unrealistic quantities — when estimated quantities significantly deviate from reality, VOB/B § 2(3) provisions apply. Third: Missing items — work that is technically required but not listed in the bill of quantities creates entitlements under VOB/B § 2(6). Fourth: Contradictions between bill of quantities and special conditions — when the bill of quantities specifies different requirements than the special contract conditions, the contradiction must be resolved — often in the contractor's favor. Fifth: Unclear trade interfaces — when it's not clearly defined which preliminary works are included in the scope and which are provided by the client.
VOB/B: The Legal Framework for Claims
Supplementary claims are not discretionary instruments — they are based on clearly defined contractual and legal provisions. § 2(3) VOB/B governs quantity changes: if the executed quantity deviates by more than 10% from the contract price, a unit price adjustment can be demanded. § 2(5) VOB/B concerns changed works: if the client changes the design or orders different work, the contractor is entitled to a new price. § 2(6) VOB/B governs additional works: for work not foreseen in the contract but necessary for execution, additional compensation must be agreed. § 6(6) VOB/B addresses obstruction and interruption: if the contractor is obstructed through no fault of their own, they are entitled to reimbursement of demonstrably incurred costs. In international contexts, FIDIC Clause 20 governs the procedure for claims and disputes — with strict 28-day notice requirements.
AI vs. Manual Contract Review: An Honest Comparison
AI-powered analysis doesn't replace construction lawyers — but it complements human expertise in a way that fundamentally improves the process. Time: A manual contract review by experienced construction lawyers or claims managers typically takes 5-10 working days. AI analysis delivers structured results within 24 hours. Consistency: Manual review depends on individual experience. Estimators with 20 years in civil engineering recognize different risks than building services specialists. AI systematically analyzes against all known risk indicators. Contradiction detection: This is where AI particularly excels. It automatically cross-references all documents — bill of quantities against special conditions against technical specifications against drawings. Contradictions that go unnoticed in manual single-document review are systematically identified. Where manual review excels: in evaluating edge cases, assessing enforcement chances, and providing strategic advice on claims filing. The optimal combination: AI for systematic initial analysis, human expertise for assessment and implementation.
From Identification to Action: The Practical Workflow
Identifying claims potential is only step one. What matters is implementation. The proven workflow: Step 1 — Systematic analysis of all contract documents for claims potential, ideally before bid submission. Step 2 — Formulate clarification questions: Targeted questions about identified ambiguities document the need for clarification and provide protection for later claims. Step 3 — Adjust pricing: Factor identified claims potential into your bid — as a risk premium, strategic item pricing, or conscious competitive advantage. Step 4 — Documentation from Day 1: From the first day on-site, build documentation for potential claims — daily logs, obstruction notices, photo documentation, time sheets. Step 5 — Timely filing: Claims filing with complete documentation, VOB/B references, and traceable cost calculations — within contractually agreed deadlines.
Integration with Go/No-Go and Bid Pricing
Claims potential should not be viewed in isolation — it's a key factor in two critical decisions. First: The go/no-go decision. If a tender shows high claims potential, that can be an argument for participation — provided the company has the expertise to enforce them. Conversely, systematically excessive claims potential may indicate a problematic client. Second: Bid pricing strategy. Identified claims potential enables strategic pricing: items with high claims potential can be priced more aggressively if later claims recovery is realistic. However, this requires clean documentation and a realistic assessment of enforcement chances.
Conclusion
Identifying claims potential is not legal nitpicking — it's a fundamental component of professional tender management. The combination of AI-powered analysis and human expertise offers the most efficient path to systematically identify legitimate claims and file them on time. Try the free claims potential analysis at /en/kostenlose-analyse.