Delivery Breakdown

Delivery Breakdown — Projects → Work Packages → Task Groups → Tasks (v3)

Updated 1 October 2026 to match Project Plan v3. Existing work-package and task IDs are unchanged, so monthly reports can keep measuring throughput, carry-over and ageing without rewriting history. v2 maps every work package to one of the four projects (and, within P2, to its stream) and adds WP-24 to WP-39.

Mapping to the four projects

New work packages (v2)

Original work-breakdown structure (IDs unchanged)

Task measurement rule

Every task has an ID, owner, start date, target or next-action date, status, evidence/result link and acceptance test. Every evidence item also carries a three-layer truth tag (DOCUMENTED FACT / TESTIMONY or SOURCE PENDING / LEGAL INFERENCE) and is linked in the proposition register to the proposition it supports: A (better historic title), B (BP did not own the parcel), C (the 1987 judgment depended on it), D (identified deliberate concealment) or E (operative cause). A group is complete only when all its tasks meet their acceptance tests, or an explicit decision closes the rest.

Next measurement cycle

At each month-end, every row is scored against its acceptance test as completed, carried forward, blocked, awaiting external response, re-opened or closed. The change is recorded in the next Highlight Report and rolled into Analytics.

PRINCE2 work-package control

Before a work package is treated as active, its authorised products, product descriptions, quality criteria, acceptance tests, owner, target, cost basis, dependencies and tolerances must be recorded. HubSpot tasks operationalise the work; the Wiki records the baseline and public management state. A forecast tolerance breach is raised as an exception.

PRINCE2 7 Compliance & Control Manual · PRINCE2 Control Registers

Name/location reference: Great House Farm — Name & Location Variations (historical spellings and Llandough-juxta-Penarth location forms).

8 October 2026 — Delivery amendments from forensic cross-review

New controlled products. Add the following to the delivery model without changing historical task IDs: (1) Property Description Mutation Chain; (2) WA231076/WA240304 plan-and-title reconciliation; (3) 13 January 1984 registration-event dossier; (4) 2 February 1987 amalgamation dossier; (5) Evidence-Before-Court vs Evidence-Available-to-BP matrix; (6) Authority / Delegation Chain; (7) Reopening–Indemnity–Rectification Route Matrix.

Acceptance rule: each product must identify the exact actor/entity, named person where evidenced, specific act/omission, authority, source document, counter-evidence, consequence, unresolved point and next evidence required. A work package is not complete merely because a response or acknowledgement has been received.

Isolation rule: institutional reviews remain separate. GGAT, Cadw, HMLR, courts, police, Council, companies and professional firms are not merged into a collective “government” explanation. Their exposure is assessed separately and cross-linked only where one actor’s document is evidence about another actor.