To: JYP Architect

Title: Recommendation for Extension of Time No. 04

With reference to the above project and title, and the Contractor’s Extension of Time No. 03
application (ref: PP/2205_16/PERMAS/CORRESPONDENCE/JYP/027) dated 15 th February
2024, kindly find our recommendation for your consideration:

Event 1: Unforeseen Existing Underground Utilities (TNB cable); Clause 23.8(q)

The Contractor (PP) had claimed Extension of time in pursuant to Clause 23.8 (q) - “delay
caused by any Appropriate Authority and Service Provider in carrying out, or failure to carry
out their works which affects the Contractor’s work progress…”.

It is notable that PP had failed to diligently proceeding with the work for block 1 to 5, in
which PP is supposed to start the necessary drainage work as early as 22 nd October 2022 even
though there is no outstanding technical issue, and approval to commence work is secured on
17th July 2023 for school fencing area, but the detection of TNB cable at Block 1 is only
reported on 28th February 2024, which is beyond the original completion date for drainage
work and showing that PP is self-delaying.

As such, we recommend the additional days shall be granted from 20 th January 2024
(projected completion date based on Original Work Programme and 199 days Extension of
Time granted so far), duration required to resolve TNB related issues shall be advised by
M&E consultant.

Event 2: Unforeseen Existing Underground Utilities (SAJ Pipe); Clause 23.8(t)

The Contractor (PP) had claimed Extension of time in pursuant to Clause 23.8 (t) - “delay as a
result of the execution of work for which a Provisional Quantity is included in the Contract
Bills which in the opinion of the Architect is not a reasonably accurate forecast of the quantity
of work required”.

We opined that this Clause is invalid pertaining to this delay event as the provisional quantity
allowed in the Contract is adequate and the scope was not enlarged or amended throughout
the contract.

Based on the work programme, PP is supposed to start the necessary drainage work as early
as 22nd October 2022, PP’s failure to start the required site work and hence caused a delay in
the detection of additional site matter shall be taken into account.

Further to that, this delay event was assessed and Extension of Time up to 29 th January 2024
was recommended and was granted to PP.

As such, we recommended that no further extension of time shall be granted under this Delay
Event.

Event 3: Unforeseen Boulder at Block 2,4 and 6; Clause 23.8(t)

The Contractor (PP) had claimed Extension of time in pursuant to Clause 23.8 (t) - “delay as a
result of the execution of work for which a Provisional Quantity is included in the Contract
Bills which in the opinion of the Architect is not a reasonably accurate forecast of the quantity
of work required”.
We opined that this Clause is invalid pertaining to this delay event as encountering of rock is
a site condition.

Based on the work programme, PP is supposed to start the necessary drainage work as early
as 22nd October 2022, PP’s failure to start the required site work and hence caused a delay in
the detection of additional site matter shall be taken into account.

As such, we recommend the additional 14 days required shall be from 20 th January 2024
(projected completion date based on Original Work Programme and 199 days Extension of
Time granted so far), and the revised completion date for drainage work shall be on 03 rd
February 2024, which is still within the extended completion period of 28 th February 2024 as
per Extension of Time No. 03 granted.

Summary:
To conclude, we opined that no further Extension of Time to be granted as per above delay
events, the recommended Extension of Time shall subject to comments and recommendations
by other consultants, if any.

Thank you.