[pescetom]

A real world claim at a lower level, simple but with some wrinkles.

---

West (intermediate) is Declarer in 4♠X.
North (almost intermediate) leads ♦J to the K of South, who continues diamonds ruffed by North.
North then plays ♣K which holds and he (mistakenly) continues with the Q, ruffed by West.
West pulls trumps from the top (discovering the unlucky split), leaving North in Hand.

North contemplates the dummy now down to ♥AT9 ♦AT, uncertain whether to lead a heart or a club.
West lays down his hand containing ♠63 ♥J7 ♦Q and says "it's all mine: the trumps, the hearts Ace and the diamonds are all winners".
North frowns and says "No, play on" and without waiting for reply tables a heart. West refuses to play on and calls you, the Director.

How do you proceed and what if any are your concerns?

This post has been edited by Gerardo: Today, 12:30
Reason for edit: Added the final pass so play can be followed

[Gerardo]

♥A, 2 ♦ winners, 2 good trumps.
This is consistent with the claim statement.
Declarer said "♥A" so won't duck this trick
Declarer said "all diamondS" so won't block them.
Down 1.

[smerriman]

According to the laws, the first step is asking North why he rejected the claim.

The second step is seeing any such reason is silly and ruling 1 down.

My concern is that someone thinks there is a concern The odd thing is that it wasn't even North that called the director; West could have just played on as stated and taken down 1 without adjudication even if their original claim did happen to be insufficient..

If anything is wrong here, it was North playing a card before West had agreed to play on, but that's insignificant.