$1B Kato Secondary School …Court action still on the books for Kares Engineering –Minister Patterson

Mar 02, 2017 News

---

Kares Engineering Inc. may be getting a second chance to redeem itself regarding the $1B Kato Secondary School which it left fraught with defects. But this in no way means that the company is off the hook.

According to Minister of Public Infrastructure, David Patterson, the option of Government going to courts is still on the table.
The politician maintained that the initial work done by the contractor can only be described as a “grotesque” waste of taxpayers’ monies.
He was then reminded that Government had asked the Attorney General’s Chambers to examine the Kato contract with an aim to seeing to what extent the contractor could be held culpable.
Patterson said that a number of options were presented by the AG Chambers. He said that Government was advised that it could terminate the contract with the company and go to court.
“We were also advised that we could amend the contract and get the contractor to get all the corrective works done and he would be standing the cost for all of it. The contractor has acknowledged that he is in default and made an offer to rectify it.”
He added, “We are trying to establish an independent oversight committee, inclusive of several stakeholders such as members of the Guyana Association of Professional Engineers (GAPE) and the Toshaos Council. So the contractor is going to be operating under strict supervision this time around.”
The Minister also noted that if the corrective works are not up to standard, then “it is straight to court we are going.”
“We are still to determine the full extent of the works to be rectified but this contractor is still blacklisted. He is not off the hook with this second chance.”
Patterson recalled that the construction of the Kato Secondary School was conceptualized due to the recognition of several benefits. For one, he said that the school, when completed, was intended to accommodate approximately 400 students and would serve children from other communities such as Monkey Mountain, Kurukubaru, Kopinang, and Itabac.
He said, “This would have led to a reduction on the strain currently seen at the Paramakatoi Secondary School. In some cases, children are forced to travel outside the region due to overcrowding and a lack of facilities.
“In other cases, parents are warned that their children might have to remain in primary school. Cases like these should no longer be acceptable. The Kato Secondary School was expected to be the outlet to ease these tensions.”
Patterson said that it was hoped that upon its completion, the school would also have a dormitory to house more than 250 students; an industrial arts department; two science laboratories; a library; and other state-of-the-art facilities, which are all necessary towards building brighter futures.
He said that the school was also a precondition for the Kato Hydropower Project, which would have benefited from nearly €2M in funding from the European Union.
The Public Infrastructure Minister recalled that the contract for such an ambitious undertaking was awarded in late 2012 to Kares Engineering Inc. Work commenced in 2013, with a completion date set for April 2015.
He said that the project has been plagued with delays and a subsequent audit of it revealed severe structural defects.
From the findings, Patterson said that it was revealed that approximately 60 percent of the project had defects, with another 30 percent just over the borderline. Only about 10 percent of the project was deemed structurally sound, he said.
Minister Patterson said that because of the shoddy work done by the contractor, some students would be unable to attend secondary school for another year and parents would be forced to reorganize their plans.
Patterson also stressed that there is a need to rid Guyana of unhealthy procurement practices which he said are clearly the case with the Kato Secondary School.
He made reference to the Technical Financial Audit Report on the School which was completed by Rodrigues Architects Ltd. Patterson said that the report points out that structurally, the quality of the reinforced concrete and other elements were deemed substandard.
He said that the construction was poorly done to maximize profits and the level of oversight by the supervising firm was severely lacking while the Clerk-of-Works was negligent in the execution of duties.
Patterson said that it was recommended that the corridor of the school be partially demolished and reconstructed with galvanized metal decking and for the stairways to be destroyed and be replaced with suitably designed timber.
The Public Infrastructure Minister said that based on the numerous building defects, it is clear that the project design and construction did not have the benefit of Professional Architectural input.
Patterson noted, too, that the post-contract services of the supervising firm, Designs and Construction Services Limited (DCSL) failed to address the issue of amendments and extensions to the design contract buildings.
The politician said that Kares Engineering Inc. simply failed to produce a completed project according to the terms of the contract as is evident by the poor quality of the building. What unnerves Patterson also is the fact that the contractor was overpaid for the current works completed and paid well in excess of the present value of works on site.
With the aforementioned in mind, the Public Infrastructure Minister insisted that the consultants are just as culpable of trying to hoodwink the nation.
Meanwhile, the supervising firm had said that it never signed off on the poor work executed by the contractor.
In fact, DCSL’s Managing Director, Ravi Ramlakhan, made this comment in response to the draft technical report on the School.
The consultant made it clear that Kares Engineering never completed the job to its satisfaction and as such, it did not issue a Certificate of Practical Completion.
DCSL also reported that Kares Engineering would often report directly to the Ministry and submit erroneous or misleading progress reports.
These progress reports were designed to ensure that the then Ministry of Education could keep itself up to date with the construction, which began in 2013. According to the consultants, however, they frequently had to intervene to disprove the statements made by the firm and “(set) the record straight to the Ministry.”

---

---