Response to the Mockup apartment inspection comments

Our Ref: xxx

Date:

To

xxx Contracting LLC

P. O. Box xxx

Dubai, U.A.E.

Attention            : Mr. xxx, Group Procurement Manager

Project                 : : xxx Tower, Dubai – U.A.E.

Subject                 : Response to the Mockup apartment inspection comments

Reference: a) xxx dated 28 September, xxx

Dear Sir,

We are writing to you with regards to the comments received via Email on 07 January xxx on the mockup apartment which included comments related to the 3 first in place pods types 01M, 02M & 03M and would like to respond point wise to each comment:

Comment #31: Wall tile pattern variants too similar with some lines appearing as breakages.

M/s xxx (Contractor Name) response: Tiles are a free issue material selected, procured and delivered to M/s xxx (Contractor Name) by the Main Contractor. During the production of the first in place mockup pods, the quantity of the tiles received from the Contractor was just sufficient to tile the mockup pods and there was no buffer in the quantities to allow for any segregation or additional randomness. The same was notified in our letter ref (a).

In addition, with regards to the tile pattern that has lines appearing as breakages, we were only notified not to use this tile pattern in the site observation report received on 08 December xxx and that request was implemented in all the new pods entering production from the date of receipt of the observation. 

Comment #32: Wall tile lippage evident, specifically at tile corners.

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 (Appendix A).

In addition, we remind you that the quantity of tiles received from the Contractor during the mockup time was just sufficient to tile the mockup pods and there was no buffer in the quantities to allow for any segregation in our factory.

The lipping that you may observe is within the tolerance of the tile supplied by the Main Contractor.  If this is not acceptable, then M/s xxx (Contractor Name) will have no option but to reject any tile supplied by the Main Contractor which is not perfectly flat in all directions or which has a dimensional variance higher than zero.

Comment #33: Wall tile grout has too many variants

M/s xxx (Contractor Name) response: Our team already started the touch up works for the grout and the color result will be consistent.

Comment #36: Vanity towel rails missing.

M/s xxx (Contractor Name) response: Towel rails are a free issue material procured and supplied by the Main Contractor and were installed in the mockup pods as soon as they were received from the Main Contractor.

Comment #37: Shower threshold chamfer to match bathrooms entry door.

M/s xxx (Contractor Name) response: The shower threshold chamfer is in accordance with the approved pod drawings. The entry door of the bathrooms is not in the scope of M/s xxx (Contractor Name). Should you wish to change the chamfer size for the thresholds which have not yet entered production, kindly confirm so we can instruct the same to the supplier and we will advise you on which remaining pods such a change will be applicable to.

In closing, M/s xxx (Contractor Name) is attending to the grouting which is currently ongoing. All the other comments are either closed or do not relate to M/s xxx (Contractor Name).

This is for record, information and necessary action.

Yours faithfully,

On behalf of xxx LLC                                                                      

xxx

project Manager