Response to Progress Delay of Pod Deliveries to xxx Towers

Our Ref: xxx

Date: xxx

To                    :           xxx Middle East,

                                    P.O.Box xxx,

            Dubai – UAE.

Attention          :           Mr. xxx

                        :           Project Manager

Project             :           xxx Towers Project, Dubai

Subject:                Response to Progress Delay of Pod Deliveries to xxx Towers

Dear Sir,

We are in receipt of your letter Ref: xxx dated 13^th April xxxx subject “Progress Delay of Pod Deliveries to Act1|Act2 Towers, and clarify as follows.

The statement that Xxxx managed to deliver only 17 nos of pods last week is incorrect and does not reflect site reality. On the 8^th of April xxxx we have received an email from XXXX (attached) that level 35 should be put on hold and subsequently all 21 completed pods which were ready for delivery at this time were put on hold by XXXX and therefore not delivered.

In reply to point #1

We currently have over 130 pods in our factory ready for delivery, all of which are hindered by a lack of approval of a single material which is the marble. All remaining pods for C2 level 29 are currently available within this stock.

Approval of Marble

Your letter fails to address the root cause affecting delivery to site as communicated in our letter Ref. UP-1683/LET-964-20/BM-lc dated 16^th March xxxx and previous communication on the subject and as again notified through our email dated 25^th of March xxxx (attached), which is the lack of reasonable approval of the marble.

After all previous suppliers of marble have pulled out due to the unreasonably high rejection rate, our current supplier Najmat Kashmeer, who was appointed on an urgent basis at the end of March xxxx in coordination with XXXX, has submitted 100 marble sets (from approved slabs), out of which he has received over 40 rejections.

This rate of rejection due to a complete disregard to industry standard and lack understanding of the natural stone during inspection is an exact repetition of what we have faced with previous suppliers, all of whom have stopped supplying as a result.

We have done all that is reasonably expected from us to resolve the marble issue, however XXXX again continues to ignore the real problem associated with the randomness and uncertainty of the marble approval process, and again tries to fallaciously pass it on Xxxx.

In reply to point #2

The irregular pattern of deliveries has been initiated by XXXX not by Xxxx. XXXX has instructed Xxxx to put floors on hold, which has forced a re-shuffle of the deliveries and has disrupted our production and delivery, especially taking into consideration the issues related to the marble approvals. Please refer to table below and attached emails dated 12^th December xxxx, 12^th March xxxx and 9^th April xxxx.

Additionally, the instruction of XXXX for a change of the colour scheme for tower C2 as received on the 22^nd of March xxxx through Mail Number: xxx reference No.XXXX-RFI-000712 has forced Xxxx to abort production on affected pods, re-adjust sequencing and material supply of these pods which has further disrupted our operation.

Please put in place your final sequence with our projects team, and we will advise accordingly on the revised tentative schedule.

In reply to point #3

Delivery of pods has not been affected by the current restrictions. We have organized all logistical and trucking activities in consideration of current restrictions. Xxxx has at no time halted deliveries to site unless this has come as an instruction from XXXX site team.

In conclusion

We totally and categorically reject any allegation that Xxxx is responsible for delays in delivery of pods, as these delays are both the result of changes in sequence instructed by XXXX and the result of continual persistence from XXXX to not objectively address the marble approval process.

Xxxx shall in no way be held responsible for resulting consequences direct or indirect from the above.

Moreover, having full awareness of the ongoing issues related to the marble approval process by the Engineer, XXXX can chose at its own discretion to have readily available pods delivered without the marble to facilitate any other trades on site, rather than again pushing the fundamental issue of marble arbitrarily on Xxxx.

In closing, and in reference to our letter Ref. UP-168/LET-968-20/AP dated 30^th March, xxxx we again notify XXXX that due payments relating to IPA 4 (60 days delay) and IPA 5 (30 days delay) have still not been released which is a direct breach to our Terms of Payment.

Subsequently, we hereby again reserve our right under the Contract to claim for EOT for non-compliance to the Terms of Payment as set out in our Sub-Contract Agreement and we again further notify XXXX that Xxxx will consequently not be held responsible for any resulting impact on production/delivery.

Yours faithfully,

On behalf of  xxx LLC

xxx

Project Manager