Response to Design Guardian Site Observation Report No. xxx
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 : Response to Design Guardian Site Observation Report No. xxx
Reference : a) UP-1763/LET-1333-21/LS-ng dated 15 December xxx
b) UP-1763/LET-1344-22/LS-at dated 14 January xxx
c) UP-1763/LET-1272-21/LS-at dated 28 September xxx
d) UP-1763/LET-1377-22/LS-at dated 18 March xxx
e) UP-1763/LET-1379-22/LS-at dated 18 March xxx
Dear Sir,
We are writing in response to your letter ref: ASCC/J‐256/UNI‐OUT/836/22 dated 23 March xxx and we fundamentally reject the allegations of serious issues in terms of pod finishes quality, especially when such finishes relate to materials supplied by the Main Contractor.
First, you are requesting us to comply with the requirement mentioned in the site observation report ref: DG-ARCH-SOR-013 and generally stating to initiate corrective actions, while disregarding earlier replies in our letters referenced above which are again recorded point wise below.
- 26th Floor Master Bathroom – bath surround edge lipping not accepted, this should be flush with edge of bath wall & adjacent corner as commented in attached shop drawing and as per the approved IFC detail. Bath wall interface detail / finish with corner wall also not accepted. Bath surround joint detail edge is very rough, should not present a dark line. Trap access panel to be completed.
M/s xxx (Contractor Name) response: The bathtub stone tops are adjusted and are as per the approved pod shop drawings. (See appendix 1)
On the other hand, the bathtub access panel is kept not installed intentionally to avoid its damage until the MEP testing and commissioning is completed. It will be installed during snagging-De-snagging phase unless you would like us to install it at this stage, then let us know and we will proceed with it immediately.
However, we will not be responsible for any damage that may occur at a later stage for the access tile if it’s installed now.
- Grout color for all pods in 26th floor and below to be checked and verified by M/s xxx (Contractor Name)/ASCC as matching with approved grout and approved first floor mockup apartment. Provide tiled & grouted board (200 x 200 mm) for verification purposes to match first floor mockup pods. Grout consistency has improved however grout as applied appears too white.
M/s xxx (Contractor Name) response: Grout color is under investigation, and we will revert back to you with the conclusions of the manufacturer.
Please note that the grout color impact only appears when in contact with tiles type TL202, while no variation was observed with the same grout when in contact with feature wall tiles. For that, the situation is being monitored closely in collaboration with the grout manufacturer.
We will revert back to the Main Contractor and the sample board requested by the Designer is being prepared and will be delivered to site at the earliest.
- 26th Floor bathroom – Some inconsistent grey patching with grout.
M/s xxx (Contractor Name) response: Please refer to our response to point #2.
- 26th floor – Tile lipping still evident across a number of Pod floors. Not accepted. Must be rectified as causes a hygiene concern.
M/s xxx (Contractor Name) response: We again reiterate that the lipping is a direct consequence of cupping/bending in the tiles procured and supplied by the Main Contractor.
M/s xxx (Contractor Name) has raised its concerns on the quality of the supplied tiles since the first delivery and we have issued several quality reports to the Main Contractor in which cupping/bending and other issues relating to general dimension tolerances of the tiles were highlighted. You can refer to letters ref (a) & (b) above.
We have also already notified the Main Contractor that the varying differences in bends and undulations can even be observed in these tiles when selected from a same box. We further remind the Main Contractor that his own tile supplier has executed a mockup wall at the start of the project which has demonstrated very clearly for all parties that lipping is unavoidable using the available tile tolerances and the staggered design of floor tiles is highlighting more the undulations and lippage.
M/s xxx (Contractor Name) is delivering the best product quality possible based on the quality of tile materials delivered by the Main Contractor and no amount of workmanship can rectify bends and dimensional variances in the tiles.
M/s xxx (Contractor Name) is taking all possible measures to ensure that tile lipping remains as close as possible to the tolerance allowed by the project specification and international standards. However, we will not accept under any circumstance to be made responsible for any consequence resulting from the Main Contractor’s selection of tiles.
- 26th Floor powder room – Shelf below vanity needs to be flush with wall corner. This is a repeat comment from all SORs and must be rectified by ASCC.
M/s xxx (Contractor Name) response: The shelves are free issue items being supplied to M/s xxx (Contractor Name) from the Main Contractor and timber shelving in powder rooms is as per the approved shop drawing (appendix 2).
Accordingly, this comment is a new requirement that will have substantial abortive works.
If you would like to proceed with this design change, as per the Engineer’s new requirement, please provide us a schedule for the delivery of the new shelves, and M/s xxx (Contractor Name) will subsequently revert back with associated costs and schedule for the execution on site such abortive works.
- 1st floor pods – “rectified” chamfer edge to vanity and sink tops appears as a scorch mark. Not acceptable and must be rectified in all cases.
M/s xxx (Contractor Name) response: Noted. Edges will match the drawings in all pods.
- 26th Floor timber shelving – darker staining to edge and corner, confirm if this is repair work? Not accepted.
M/s xxx (Contractor Name) response: This is not a repair by M/s xxx (Contractor Name). The shelves are free issue items being supplied to M/s xxx (Contractor Name) from the Main Contractor and are being installed as received in the pods.
This comment is not related to M/s xxx (Contractor Name) and to be closed by the Main Contractor.
In conclusion, M/s xxx (Contractor Name) has produced the delivered pods in full compliance with the approved design, approved drawings, and approved materials. Moreover, M/s xxx (Contractor Name) has made use of the Free Issue Material which has been supplied by the Main Contractor, the quality and compliance of which is under the Main Contractor’s sole responsibility.
Accordingly M/s xxx (Contractor Name) are under no circumstances responsible for any consequences arising from such quality of materials and we urge you to close out the site observation report and send us the close out document before 15 April xxx.
Additionally we request your quality engineer to visit our factory and inspect all the pods currently in stock or under production and approve prior delivering to site.
We also remind you that M/s xxx (Contractor Name) is an off-site manufacturer which produces pods in factory, delivers completed units to site, then raises and secures approval for each pod upon delivery of pods to site and prior to installation. While M/s xxx (Contractor Name) will address any snags which are raised at final stage and during handing over in accordance with the terms of our Sub-Contract, we will not accept any rejection at final stage for which initial approval has been received, especially when such rejection relates to tiles, or any other Free Issue Material supplied by the Main Contractor.
This is for your information and records
Yours faithfully,
On behalf of M/s xxx (Contractor Name) LLC
xxx
Projects Manager