Rejection to Notice of Delay
Our Ref: xxx
Date: xxx
To : xxx Contracting Company LLC
P. O. Box xxx, Dubai, U.A.E.
Attention : Mr. xxx, Senior Project Manager
Project : xxx Tower, Dubai – U.A.E.
Subject : Rejection to Notice of Delay
References: a) xxx dated 21 June xxx
b) xxx dated 06 July xxx
c) xxx dated 09 May xxx
d) xxx dated 13 July xxx
Dear Sir,
We are in receipt of your letter ref: xxx dated 17 July xxx and record again our total rejection to your misleading allegations of delay and wrong statement stated therein and would like to respond point wise as following:
Point #1:
Durations and lead times for procurement and production have been communicated to you during initial discussion on draft agreement, we have also advised you not to delay the placement of the order.
We have attended the meeting on 04 May xxx as a sign of goodwill and support to your project. Any delay in the release of the Order is the sole responsibility of ASC.
We again refer to the Subcontract Agreement, clause #10, Programme of works delay and extension of time, “the Sub-Contractor shall commence the Sub-Contract works as soon as practicable after the receipt by him of an order in writing under this Sub-Contract from the CONTRACTOR to that effect and shall proceed with the same with due expedition and without delay”.
Based on the above the Commencement date of our Works is the date of receiving the signed Subcontract agreement which is 24 June xxx. Therefore, your statement made in your letter that our claim based on the signing on the Contract can’t be accepted is irrelevant, non-contractual and rejected.
Point #2 – Wall & Floor Tiles
You have stated in your letter that the tiles approval was received on 16 June xxx while in fact M/s xxx (Contractor Name) have only received the consultant response on 01 July xxx (appendix 1) in an email which does not include any comments and does not contain any attachment to the document.
We have collected the document the next day from your site office and we resubmitted on 12 July xxx.
Therefore your statement that almost 1 full month was wasted is totally wrong and it’s your sole responsibility that you have delayed to provide us the consultant comments for almost 2 weeks.
We would further like to inform you that the tiles order is placed, and delivery from India is expected by mid-September.
We further again remind you that M/s xxx (Contractor Name) has repeatedly advised against the selection of tiles from India due to the inherent variances in tile quality/shade that may occur in this manufacturer’s production line from one batch to another as clearly noted in the supplier’s letter attached to our material submittal dated 12 July xxx (appendix 2).
We have also repeatedly advised to select a locally available tile to ensure that the quality can be adequately controlled and avoid such an elevated risk.
M/s xxx (Contractor Name) is unable to control an overseas production line especially under the current pandemic restrictions, as such we shall hold no responsibility whatsoever if the received material deviates in shade from any previous reference sample.
Point #3 – Mosaic Tiles
You have stated in your letter that the brick mosaic tiles was rejected on 4 July xxx while we have received the commented copy on 7 July xxx only. Also, we completely reject your misleading statement that the submitted tile was rejected for failing to meet the project specifications which is a completely inaccurate statement. The tile was simply rejected for being, according to the Consultant observation, slightly darker than previous phase’s samples, although it is the same tile used in previous phases and it complies with the project specifications.
Point #4 -Paint
The MAS for Paint was submitted on 2 June xxx. You have unilaterally put the submittal on hold until obtaining a sample which was shared with you on 29 June xxx. (5 days only after the commencement date). Material is approved.
Point #5 – Drainage Pipe
We again reject your wrong and misleading statement that drainage pipe was submitted late. The MAS was submitted even prior to the commencement date on a goodwill gesture from our end and was approved on 8 July xxx while we received the approval copy on 11 July xxx.
Point #6 – Exhaust grill
Your statement is irrelevant, wrong and misleading again.
As we mentioned in our previous letter ref (d), the MAS was submitted by M/s xxx (Contractor Name) on 19 May xxx and we received the comments on 5 June xxx. We have then revised and resubmitted the MAS by 10 June xxx (appendix 3) but it was kept on hold for 9 days by ASC before informing us on 19 June xxx (appendix 4) to follow “Aldes” as per vendor list noting that the comment/rejection to our first submittal from the consultant was not due to that and didn’t mention it.
We have clarified to you that our submittal “Flowtech” was approved for previous phases already but you insisted on us to submit “Aldes” (appendix 5).
We have contacted “Aldes” who responded on 28 June xxx (appendix 6) that they don’t have the size required of 150 mm in their product range and we ended up submitting our initial proposal on 30 June xxx which is approved.
The 18 days of lost time from 10 June to 28 June xxx is totally on ASC.
Point #7 – Angle valve
The MAS was submitted on 03 June xxx (appendix 7) but the submittal was kept on hold for 16 days by ASC before informing us on 19 June xxx (appendix 4) to follow “Peglar” as per vendor list noting that the consultant didn’t reject our submittal.
We have clarified to you that our submittal “PEX” was approved for previous phases already but you insisted on us to submit “Peglar” (appendix 5).
We have contacted “Peglar” whom price was much higher than PEX and the same was informed to you and then you agreed that we resubmit “PEX” following our site meeting on 29 June xxx.
Again we ended up submitting our initial proposal on 01 July xxx which is approved.
The 26 days of lost time from 03 June xxx to 29 June xxx is totally on ASC.
Point #8 – Electrical cables
Our request for the approved MEP items was very clear and we have requested for Electrical cables – 2.5mm, 4mm and 3C heat resistant flexible cables (appendix 8)
We are not responsible for your team’s shortcomings. Also, our submittal is sent to you directly and not to the consultant and your team haven’t informed that anything is wrong in our submittal that was clearly including single core and 3 core and both from TEKAB.
Point #9 – PEX pipes
Your statement is again inaccurate. The MAS for Unidelta was submitted by M/s xxx (Contractor Name) on 6June xxx but the submittal was kept on hold for 13 days by ASC before informing us on 19 June xxx (appendix 4) to follow “FRIPEX” as per vendor list noting that the consultant didn’t reject our submittal.
We have contacted “Fripex” and arranged the submittal but following the site meeting on 29 June xxx we have been informed that “Unidelta” is acceptable to be submitted.
We submitted Unidelta again on 30 June xxx but then on 18 July xxx following the receipt of your letter we receive a reminder to submit “Fripex” while also not being notified for 18 days that Unidelta was kept on hold on your sole responsibility and without being rejected by the consultant.
Fripex submittal is under review and the 29 days of lost time from 06 June xxx to 19 June xxx then from 30 June xxx to 18 July xxx is totally on ASC.
Point #10 – Material tracker
Thank you for confirming receipt of the tracker, we will address any additional information you may require to be added to the tracker. There is not delay in the submission of the tracker.
Conclusion
We again raise our serious concern that your baseline programme still shows a commencement date for Pods on 28 April xxx, which is incorrect. Our contractual Commencement date is 24 June xxx.
While M/s xxx (Contractor Name) has done all it can to support you in goodwill before any contract was in place, we are appalled by your ongoing abuse of such goodwill to create a baseless narrative of delay on the part of M/s xxx (Contractor Name) which is both un-contractual and unacceptable.
M/s xxx (Contractor Name) has supported you on your project and will continue to provide all the support we can, however considering the number of erroneous statements made in your letter we kindly request and urge that you consider the actual facts and dates of the listed points above in order to better address any issue that may hinder the proper delivery of the project.
We urge you again to refer to our letter ref (a) which is very clear in highlighting every pre-requisite milestone required in order to reach production and delivery of pods.
Although we will extend all our efforts to improve the chances of having pods on site in a time frame compatible with your site requirements, you remain solely responsible for delaying the release of the Subcontract Agreement of M/s xxx (Contractor Name) to a date almost two months beyond what is stipulated in your baseline programme.
M/s xxx (Contractor Name) shall not hold any responsibility neither direct nor indirect for any delay to the project resulting from such actions by ASC, and we further reserve our right to claim for an Extension of Time in relation to this baseline programme of 57 days.
We again request you to ensure proper communications to M/s xxx (Contractor Name) contact persons mentioned in our letter ref (c) to ensure all your requests are responded otherwise we are not responsible for any delay in response or action.
All rights are reserved.
Yours faithfully,
On behalf of M/s xxx (Contractor Name) LLC
xxx
Projects Manager