The Importance of Auditing Opposing Evidence
Accepting the opposing party's or court expert's report (if it contains errors) without questioning is a risk you should not take. Many opinions contain flaws that may go unnoticed by a lawyer or judge but are evident to another expert engineer.
Our opinion critique work consists of subjecting the report to a rigorous technical review:
What Do We Look For in a Counter-Report?
We analyze the document looking for cracks in its argumentation:
- Regulatory Errors: Has the Building Technical Code (CTE) in force at the time of works been applied, or an obsolete standard?
- Methodological Flaws: Was data collection correct? Were appropriate tools used? Were samplings sufficient?
- Calculation Inconsistencies: Are loads well dimensioned? Are repair prices market-based?
- Bias and Subjectivity: Has the expert issued personal opinions instead of objective technical conclusions?
Value in Court
The counter-report not only serves to present an alternative view to the judge; it is a strategic tool for your lawyer. We prepare a technical script so they know exactly what to ask the opposing expert during cross-examination, exposing contradictions and weakening their credibility before the court.
Related success cases
" The opposing party presented a very voluminous report but full of inaccuracies. Perito Barcelona's counter-report was surgical, dismantling their conclusions point by point.
Civil Attorney
Case: Construction damages claim
" Thanks to their review, we detected that the insurance expert had applied repealed regulations to value repairs. We recovered the real claim value.
Company Manager
Case: Industrial claim