A line item billed past its scheduled value (over 100% complete)
The short answer: on every G703 line, Column G, total completed and stored to date, must not exceed Column C, that line’s scheduled value. When it does, the balance to finish, C - G, goes negative and the percent column reads above 100%. The line has billed more than the contract allocated to it. Scan the balance column for a negative figure and read across to Column A for the item number. The overage is G - C. Most instances are administrative rather than dishonest: scope moved between lines, approved extra work billed on the original line, a unit-price line that ran long, stored material counted twice, or a keying error. The remedy differs by cause, so name the line and ask which it is before you certify. A negative balance on one line does not stop the document from tying, which is why it gets missed.
The check, on every row
Column C is the line’s scheduled value and Column G is the total completed and stored to date, G = D + E + F. Two derived columns carry the check: the percent column, G divided by C, must not exceed 100%, and the balance to finish, C - G, must not go negative. Both report the same fact, that G has passed C.
Read the header row before you quote a column letter back to a subcontractor. On the AIA form the percent column carries no letter at all: the lettering runs A through G, then H for balance to finish and I for retainage. Many vendor spreadsheets letter the percent column H and push balance to finish into I, so name the column, not the letter. This page does that from here on.
One word covers two subjects. In construction accounting, overbilling means billings in excess of costs on a contractor’s own work-in-progress schedule. This page is the other one: a line billed past the value the schedule gave it. PayAppCheck names its flag for this condition overbilling, in the line sense, not the work-in-progress sense.
Why a line goes past its scheduled value
Five causes account for nearly all of it. Only the last two are errors in the ordinary sense.
- Scope moved between lines without a change order. Work from one item was billed against another, so one line runs over, another sits under, and no total moves.
- A change order billed on the original line. The work is approved and earned, but it went onto the existing item, so Column C never rose to meet it.
- A unit-price line that ran over quantity. The scheduled value was an estimated quantity at a fixed rate, the actual quantity came in higher, and the schedule is now stale.
- Stored material counted twice. Material billed in Column F last period was installed and added to Column E while it stayed in F, inflating the line by that amount.
- A keying error. A transposed digit, a row inserted above a total range, a formula overwritten with a typed number.
The first three are not mistakes: they are work that has outrun its paperwork. Open with a question, not an accusation.
A worked example
A $400,000 interior contract at its second application, no change orders yet, retainage 10% on completed work and on stored material. Four figures settle the question, so the table below carries the scheduled value, the total completed and stored to date, the percent and the balance. One line has billed past its value.
| A/B · Item and description | C · Sched. value | G · To date | % compl. | Balance (C - G) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 · General conditions | 60,000 | 36,000 | 60% | 24,000 |
| 2 · Concrete | 120,000 | 108,000 | 90% | 12,000 |
| 3 · Structural steel | 150,000 | 100,000 | 66.7% | 50,000 |
| 4 · Rough carpentry | 50,000 | 54,000 | 108% | -4,000 |
| 5 · Finishes | 20,000 | 0 | 0% | 20,000 |
| Totals | 400,000 | 298,000 | 74.5% | 102,000 |
Read down the balance column: four rows positive, item 4 at -4,000. The row itself is sound. Item 4 carries 38,000 billed in previous applications, 16,000 this period and nothing stored, so G = D + E + F = 54,000 is what the sub earned by its own account. The fault is that 54,000 sits against a scheduled value of 50,000, and 54,000 ÷ 50,000 = 108%. The overage is G - C = 4,000.
Nothing else is wrong. Column C adds to 400,000 and Column G to 298,000, which is 209,000 billed in previous applications plus 64,000 this period plus 25,000 of stored material, all of the stored material sitting on item 3. Item 3 stands at 100,000 ÷ 150,000 = 66.7%, and item 5 has not started.
The document still ties, and that is the point
The best-known check is the cross-form tie: the sum of Column G must equal G702 Line 4. It holds exactly here, 298,000 against 298,000, and every figure after it computes correctly.
| G702 line | Figure | Where it comes from |
|---|---|---|
| 3 · Contract sum to date | 400,000 | Line 1 + Line 2, and the sum of Column C |
| 4 · Completed and stored | 298,000 | the sum of Column G |
| 5 · Retainage | 29,800 | 5a: 10% of 273,000, plus 5b: 10% of 25,000 |
| 6 · Earned less retainage | 268,200 | Line 4 - Line 5 |
| 7 · Less previous certificates | 188,100 | the prior application’s Line 6 |
| 8 · Current payment due | 80,100 | Line 6 - Line 7 |
| 9 · Balance to finish | 131,800 | Line 3 - Line 6 |
Line 5 is 10% of 273,000 completed (27,300) plus 10% of 25,000 stored (2,500). Line 6 is 298,000 - 29,800 = 268,200, Line 8 is 268,200 - 188,100 = 80,100, and Line 9 is 400,000 - 268,200 = 131,800. Nine lines, all correct, with an item billed 8% past its value.
The continuation sheet totals hide it too. The balance column sums to 102,000, positive, because item 4’s -4,000 is absorbed by the balances around it, and it proves out against the certificate: the balance column plus Line 5 equals Line 9, 102,000 + 29,800 = 131,800. Billing past a line’s scheduled value is invisible to every total on the document for as long as the other lines have enough balance left to absorb it, which on a real sheet is nearly always. Push one line far enough and it does surface: had item 4 billed 160,000 rather than 54,000, Column G would sum to 404,000 against a contract sum to date of 400,000, Line 4 would exceed Line 3, and the balance column would total -4,000. Short of that, the fault exists only at row level. When the totals themselves stop tying, the gap points at the cell: when the G703 does not match the G702.
What to send back
Send one message naming the line and the numbers, not a rejection saying the application looks wrong. Four facts settle it: item number, scheduled value, amount billed to date, and the overage.
Item 4, Rough carpentry. Scheduled value 50,000. Completed and stored to date 54,000, 108% complete, balance to finish -4,000. Confirm which applies: approved extra scope needing a change order and its own line, scope moved from another item, a unit-price overrun, stored material left in Column F, or a keying error. Resubmit with the correction and the backup.
Ask which cause it is, because the remedy differs by cause. Receivers hold that line until the answer comes back, since certifying it pays for scope the contract does not yet contain. The wider sequence is in the receiver’s review checklist.
The change-order remedy
When the answer is approved extra scope, the correction is fixed. A change order lands in Line 2 and on a new G703 line. It never edits Line 1, and it never raises an existing line’s Column C quietly. Line 1 stays the original contract sum, and Line 3 = Line 1 + Line 2 is what Column C must sum to.
The extra carpentry is approved and priced at 4,000. Line 2 becomes 4,000, Line 3 becomes 404,000, and the extra moves onto its own line:
| Line | C · Sched. value | G · To date | % compl. | Balance (C - G) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 · Rough carpentry, as billed | 50,000 | 54,000 | 108% | -4,000 |
| 4 · Rough carpentry, corrected | 50,000 | 50,000 | 100% | 0 |
| 6 · CO 1, extra blocking | 4,000 | 4,000 | 100% | 0 |
Across the whole sheet Column C now sums to 404,000, the four untouched lines at 350,000 plus item 4 back at 50,000 plus the new line at 4,000, matching the new Line 3. Column G still sums to 298,000, so Line 4, Line 6 and the payment do not move: the same money, now billed against scope the contract contains. Line 9 does move, because there is 4,000 more scope left to bill. It becomes 404,000 - 268,200 = 135,800, the balance column rises to 106,000 with item 4 back at zero, and 106,000 + 29,800 = 135,800 still holds. Raise item 4 to 54,000 instead and the sheet ties too, but the original scheduled value is lost. The worked schedule of values follows the same rule.
What software settles here, and what it does not
PayAppCheck recomputes every line of the uploaded application: G = D + E + F, the percent, and C - G, and flags each row where Column G exceeds Column C beyond the rounding tolerance, alongside the column totals and the cross-form ties. When the prior application is already in the account, it also checks each line’s Column D against what that line had billed by the end of the prior period, which catches a restated carry-forward. What it cannot do is read your contract, know whether a change order was signed, or judge whether a unit-price overrun is payable: it gives you the line, the scheduled value, the amount billed and the overage, and hands you the question. The free G703 checker flags a line billed past its scheduled value from figures you type, no signup.
Questions people ask
It means the line has billed more than its scheduled value. The percent column is Column G, total completed and stored to date, divided by Column C, the scheduled value for that line, so a figure above 100% says G has passed C. The same condition shows as a negative balance to finish, C minus G. The amount at issue is G minus C, and the line is not payable at that figure until a change order adds the scope.
Yes, and it almost always does. The cross-form tie is the sum of Column G against Line 4 on the G702, and a line over its scheduled value moves both of those figures by the same amount, so the tie still holds. The continuation sheet totals hide it too: one negative balance to finish is absorbed by the positive balances on the other lines. Only a per-row comparison of Column G against Column C finds it.
Most of the time it is administrative. The distinguishing evidence differs by cause: moved scope shows a matching under-billed line elsewhere on the same sheet, an unbilled change order shows up in the correspondence, a unit-price overrun shows in the quantity backup, and double-counted stored material shows as a Column F that never fell while Column E rose. Ask for the backup that separates them before treating it as anything else.
The fix depends on the cause. Approved extra scope goes on the G702 as Line 2 and on the G703 as a new line with its own scheduled value, never as a silent increase to the existing line’s Column C. Scope moved between lines is corrected on both lines and moves no total. Stored material counted twice is corrected by clearing Column F, which lowers Column G and the payment.
No. Line 1 is the original contract sum and holds that figure for the life of the job. Approved change orders net into Line 2, and Line 3 is Line 1 plus Line 2, the contract sum to date. After every change order the sum of Column C must equal Line 3. Raising an existing line’s Column C in place destroys the record of what was originally scheduled.
Whether to certify is your team’s decision. What the document shows is that a line with a negative balance to finish is billed against scope the contract does not currently contain. Two options receivers use: hold the application and ask for a corrected one, or certify everything except the overage and pay the rest while the change order is priced.
Upload the application and every G703 row is recomputed: G = D + E + F, the percent, and the balance to finish, with any line billed past its scheduled value flagged by item number and overage.
Try PayAppCheck freeNo card required. Sign up with an email.