XN000022-1975-10-10 — Page 4

3 -

FRIDAY, OCTOBER 10, 1975

BUILDING CONTRACTOR FINED $50,000 BY DISCIPLINARY BOARD

*******

THE REGISTERED CONTRACTORS' DISCIPLINARY BOARD' HAS FINED A *''ILDING CONTRACTOR $50,000 FOR FAILING TO ADHERE TO BUILDING PLANS APPROVED UNDER THE BUILDINGS ORDINANCE BY THE BUILDING AUTHORITY.

--

THE BOARD ALSO ORDERED THE COMPANY THE GLORIOUS BUILDING CONTRACTORS LTD. - TO PAY COSTS OF $7,500 RESULTING FROM THE BOARD'S INQUIRY.

THE FINE IS ADDITIONAL TO A $20,000 FINE PREVIOUSLY IMPOSED ON THE COMPANY BY THE COURT.

DETAILS OF THE CHARGE AGAINST THE COMPANY AND THE FINE IMPOSED BY THE BOARD ARE PUBLISHED IN TODAY'S GOVERNMENT GAZETTE.

THE OFFENCE CONCERNED WORK IN RESPECT OF A MAIN SHEAR WALL FOR A MULTI-STOREY BUILDING AT 36 KOTEWALL ROAD WHICH WAS. BADLY DAMAGED IN THE 1972 PO SHAN ROAD LANDSLIDE DISASTER.

THE CHAIRMAN OF THE REGISTERED CONTRACTORS' DISCIPLINARY BOARD, GOVERNMENT QUANTITY SURVEYOR MR. M.M. LUXTON OF THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, SAID THE APPROVED PLAN CALLED FOR THE STRENGTHENING OF THE SHEAR WALL BY THE ADDITION OF NEW REINFORCED CONCRETE WALLING ON EACH SIDE AND FOR THIS NEW WALLING AND THE EXISTING WALLING TO BE JOINED TOGETHER BY THE WELDING OF STEEL LINKS.

BUT A PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT INSPECTION DURING THE PROGRESS OF THE WORK HAD SHOWN THAT THE NEW STEEL LINKS HAD NOT BEEN WELDED TOGETHER AS REQUIRED.

CONSEQUENTLY THE WORK WAS ORDERED STOPPED AND THE DEFECTIVE WORK DEMOLISHED AND REPLACED BY NEW WORK IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLANS APPROVED BY THE BUILDING AUTHORITY.

IN ITS FINDINGS, THE BOARD SAID: THE BOARD IS APPALLED THAT SUCH A FLAGRANT DISREGARD FOR SAFETY MEASURES SHOULD BE PERPETRATED FOLLOWING THE RESULTS OF ONE OF THE WORST DISASTERS IN HONG KONG'S HISTORY

+WE ARE CONSCIOUS OF THE FACT THAT HAD THIS MATTER GONE UNDETECTED THEN THE ENTIRE BUILDING MIGHT HAVE BEEN RENDERED IN AN UNSAFE CONDITION UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES WITH THE POSSIBILITY OF YET ANOTHER DISASTER OF MAJOR PROPORTIONS ....

+THE BOARD CONSIDERS THAT CONTRACTORS MUST BE MADE AWARE OF THEIR RESPONSIBILITIES TO THE PUBLIC, AND IN THIS CASE WE FIND THAT THE GLORIOUS BUILDING CONTRACTORS LTD.'S MANAGEMENT OF THIS PART OF THE CONTRACT WAS GROSSLY INADEQUATE.+

MR. LUXTON SAID THE BOARD HAD CONSIDERED DE-REGISTERING THE CONTRACTING FIRM, BUT HAD DECIDED AGAINST THIS BECAUSE IT WOULD HAVE MEANT STOPPING WORK ON SEVERAL BIG CONTRACTS NOW BEING UNDERTAKEN BY THE COMPANY, WITH RESULTING MAJOR UNEMPLOYMENT. HOWEVER, DE-REGISTRATION WOULD FOLLOW IMMEDIATELY IN THE EVENT OF ANY FURTHER OFFENCE.

14