Pods Vanity Counter top & Cistern Top deviation against approved top material
Our Ref: xxx
Date:
To
xxx Contracting LLC
P. O. Box xxx
Dubai, U.A.E.
Attention : Mr. xxx, Group Procurement Manager
Project : xxx Phase 2
Subject : Pods Vanity Counter top & Cistern Top deviation against approved top material
References :
- M/s xxx (Contractor Name) letter xxx dated 17th January xxxx
- M/s xxx (Contractor Name) letter xxx dated 04th January xxxx
- M/s xxx (Contractor Name) letter xxx dated 24th November xxxx
- M/s xxx (Contractor Name) letter xxx dated 14th January xxxx
- M/s xxx (Contractor Name) letter xxx dated 01st February xxxx
Dear Sir,
We refer to your letter ref: xxx dated 23 January xxxx and respond as follows:
In reply to introduction:
We urge you to read your own list of references just above your introduction before you make such pointless statements.
The following is recorded in the list of references in your own letter as follows: “03. Our letter xxx dated 12 January xxxx (Annexure E)”
There is no continuous and intentional approach for M/s M/s xxx (Contractor Name) to mislead facts. Your recurring bad faith in the execution of our subcontract is again apparent.
In reply to section 1
We refer again to the facts recorded in our previous reply in our letter reference (a):
The program of works is issued by M/s xxx (Contractor Name) is enclosed under letter Ref: xxx dated 15 September xxxx. This schedule includes a sequence of deliveries on which the following milestone is recorded: “The approval for the Programme of Works must be received by BGC by 16 Sep xxxx.” M/s xxx (Client Name) has intentionally delayed the approval to the program of works until 24 September xxxx.
The sequence of deliveries was disrupted by M/s xxx (Client Name), not by M/s xxx (Contractor Name). Even with your delay in approving the program, M/s xxx (Contractor Name) still succeeded in completing deliveries by 26 November xxxx.
Again, you are intentionally referencing a superseded email dated 19 July xxxx which is irrelevant to the agreed program and sequence issued on 15 September xxxx.
Your statement that the sequence of delivery was disrupted by M/s xxx (Contractor Name) due to marble issues at our factory is baseless and unfounded. Our ongoing concerns on the marble issues are recorded in our letters reference (d) & (e).
With reference to the completion of the deliveries on 26 November xxxx, please refer to the signed delivery notes which show that the last POD was delivered on 26 November xxxx. With reference to your letter BGC/SC/D17-85D/UNIPOD/0049 dated 27th December xxxx, please note that M/s xxx (Contractor Name) has already replied to this letter through our letter reference (b).
In reply to section 2
Point 1
Again, you are intentionally referencing a superseded email dated 19 July xxxx which is irrelevant to the agreed program and sequence issued on 15 September xxxx. Please refer to section 1 above for our reply to the alleged disruption of sequence of deliveries.
We again record that marble approval did not have any impact on the sequence of deliveries, and deliveries were completed on the 26 November xxxx, please refer to signed delivery notes showing last delivery on 26 November xxxx.
It is an undeniable fact that BGC clearly did not arrange all the logistics based on agreed program or sequence, since BGC failed to provide the loading platforms on the first 14 days of the planned delivery from 11th October to 25th October. Please refer to letter reference (c), which also show pictures of PODs offloaded at ground floor due to the lack of platforms to place them at their intended levels.
Points 2 & 3
We again refer you to the facts recorded under our letter referenced letter (c) and its appendices. Our response in letter reference (a) remains valid and factual.
Point 4
This point has been replied to very clearly in our letter reference (a) and this reply remains valid.
Again, you are intentionally referencing a superseded email dated 19 July xxxx which is irrelevant to the agreed program and sequence issued on 15 September xxxx. Please refer to section 1 above for our reply to the alleged disruption of sequence of deliveries.
You are trying to mix sequence of activities on site to sequence of deliveries to site, in an attempt to justify your allegations. Your reply is again another attempt to deflect from the subject at hand and has no relation to the sequence of deliveries which was the basis of our previous reply.
All pods have been delivered to site by 26th November xxxx in accordance with the agreed program. This is a fact, again you may refer the signed delivery notes.
Another fact stands that BGC has failed to provide us with any MEP clearance in any building on any floor to allow us to install the pods at their final locations. We again request you to issue a copy of such clearances in any further reply if you deem our comment inaccurate.
We agree that the marble approval process and the abnormally high rate of rejection are still an ongoing concern on this contract, please refer to letters reference (d) & (e) in this regard.
Point 5
Our earlier statements and reply to this point are clear and remain unchanged.
We reject your allegations of delay in the delivery of PODs of 55 days. Please refer to attached signed delivery notes for all PODs.
With reference to the marble issue, please refer to letter reference (d) & (e) in this regard.
Contractor’s default on advance payment
We are appalled and outraged that you find the payment terms stipulated in our Subcontract “irrelevant”.
The email communication you are referencing and enclosing to your letter are your own emails which contain your own and do not represent in any way shape or form an acceptance of M/s xxx (Contractor Name) on any change in payment terms, or any acknowledgement of receipt of the advance payment.
The fact remains that you have completely failed to adhere by the Subcontract terms & conditions, and you remain in default of your obligations in releasing the advance payment, progress payment and work certifications in accordance with the terms stipulated therein.
Attributing such defaults to the current economic climate and given circumstances is very well noted, however please bear in mind that M/s xxx (Contractor Name), under the same economic climate, has nonetheless invested the full amount of the project and completed the full production and delivery of all the PODs to site.
We again reserve our rights for an Extension of Time (EOT) equivalent to the same number of days by which our advance payment is delayed in addition to the number of days by which you are delaying our certification and progress payments.
All rights are reserved.
Yours faithfully,
On behalf of xxx LLC
xxx
project Manager