131
(D
as
le
ne
'd
1 [11 am]
2
3
4
5
6
MR HO: So indirectly you would say that you are
satisfied with the consultants' performance.
D of Ar S: When reading or going over the records I'm not quite happy about the way the consultant responded to requests or responded to the situation, and that's the only thing. Maybe it has 8 something to do with or should be decided as attitude rather than 9 technical performance.
7
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
MR HO: But, in any case, Government has been spending more money than it should and, therefore, have you thought of getting legal advice in asking the consultant to compensate part
of the
?
19
D of Ar S: At the time we have already more or less made a professional decision that it was no point in pursuing it because there are factors that might affect the success of the case. And I'm very glad that you bring this up that now we have acquired legal advice that proved in the end that our decision not to pursue
it was the correct one.
20
21
22
23
24
MR HO: Not to pursue what?
D of Ar S: Not to pursue. In other words, not to pursue 25 legal action against the negligence of the consultant.
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
33 33
CHAIRMAN: Well, that might be the legal advice but I beg to differ from your opinion based on the report in 137.
read here: [Reads]
"The consultants' design relied on waterproof concrete
for waterproofing as an alternative to conventional tanking by rock asphalt. During the construction period the contractor informed the consultants that
the waterproof concrete will hardly be able to restrain leakage of underground water."
May I
He was told and the contractor has since been proven right and the