2018 - APC Part 2 Assessors Notes

QUANTITY SURVEYING DIVISION
ASSESSMENT OF PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE
FINAL ASSESSMENT 2018
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
Tuesday, 18th September, 2018

and
Wednesday, 19th September, 2018
THE HONG KONG INSTITUTE OF SURVEYORS
TH TH
FINAL ASSESSMENT – 18 & 19 SEPTEMBER 2018
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS
CONTENTS
1) Candidates’ Role
2) Candidates’ Experience
3) Depth of Answers
4) Format and Style of Answers
5) Notes to Assessors
6) Marking
7) Acceptance Standard
8) General Notes
9) Notes to Candidates (as given in the Question Paper)
10) Five Common Criteria (as given in the Question Paper)
Page 2
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS
1.0 CANDIDATES’ ROLE
1.1 Candidates should approach the submissions in the role of a manager /

supervisor considering letters, reports, estimates, etc. which have been
prepared by a qualified member of staff, ready for typing and signature and
formal issuance by the company to the requesting party in accordance with
the Instructions to Candidates.
2.0 CANDIDATES’ EXPERIENCE
2.1 In many cases, Candidates would not have much experience of the
situations encountered in this Final Assessment. This should be kept in
mind when carrying out your assessment.
3.0 DEPTH OF ANSWERS
3.1 The question paper is quite extensive. Candidates were required to

consider a range of problems. In the limited time available, it is expected
that Candidates would cover the main principles of each issue.
3.2 Candidates are not expected to go into exhaustive detail, quoting

extensively from textbooks, but should address the crucial points and
demonstrate an understanding of the fundamental requirements of each
question. Where appropriate, Candidates should provide a brief account of
the issues involved, and state any rationales that support their argument
given in the answers. Merely stating the issues without giving the
reasoning would not be considered as satisfactory.
3.3 The answers given by Candidates should show that they had identified the
problem, recognised a practical solution and given constructive professional
advice or solid arguments to the recipient. You should put yourselves in the
position of the recipient and ask if you have received proper advice on the
problem or if you could easily reject the arguments.
Page 3
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS
4.0 FORMAT AND STYLE OF ANSWERS
4.1 When the questions require a letter, a report, a memo or an e-mail to be

drafted, Candidates’ answers should be in the form of a letter, a report, a
memo or an e-mail as required with date, addressee, title, salutation, space
for signature, etc.
4.2 Candidates should begin their answers with a brief introductory description
of the matter being asked, such as “With reference to the telephone
conversation with you yesterday regarding …”, “We refer to your query
regarding …”, etc. They should not jump straight to give points of answers.
4.3 Candidates should lay out their answers systematically. Lengthy

paragraphs not broken into an itemized or annotated list would be difficult to
read. On the other hand, answers given all in point form without an
introductory sentence would not be a good style.
4.4 It is not suggested that you should mark down the paper if the format and
style of the answers are not in the above desirable conditions. However,
answers should be presented in a professional manner such that the
recipient would understand the answers.
5.0 NOTES TO ASSESSORS
5.1 The Notes to Assessors are given here to:
(a) simplify your task in assessing Candidates’ answers; and

(b) facilitate a more uniform level of assessment.
5.2 The time spent in preparing the Notes to Assessors is much more than that
allowed to Candidates. Therefore, Candidates should not be expected to
mention all the points given in the Notes to Assessors for full marks. It
should be considered as Acceptable if a Candidate could address the core
issues.
5.3 Other valid points given by Candidates should be admitted, particularly

when the question can have alternative interpretation to that intended by
the question drafter and the Notes to Assessors.
Page 4
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS
6.0 MARKING
6.1 The Practice Problems (Part II Written Test) were undertaken in an

examination hall on two days – each lasting for 4 hours.
6.2 See “NOTES TO CANDIDATES” below for the number of questions and the
passing marks.
6.3 A marking sheet is given in table form for you to assign marks.
6.4 Just before the final total of each day’s paper, a line is given for you to add
discretionary bonus marks of up to 2.5 marks. The bonus marks should be
given to Candidates for good presentation, good English, good handwriting,
and those who deserve a few more marks after your second-thoughts on
their overall performance and potential.
6.5 You should not write notes or other marks on the submissions which you
are assessing since such notes or other marks may influence the next
Assessor’s marking.
7.0 ACCEPTANCE STANDARD
7.1 In case you desire not to follow the Notes to Assessors in detail or you want
a simper guide, you are offered the following questions to ask yourself
when giving your marks:
(a) Would I sign the letter for dispatch after minor editing corrections as
supervisor?
(b) Would the recipient consider sufficient advice has been given?
(c) Could the recipient easily reject the arguments?
7.2 If the answers are “yes” to (a) and (b) and “no” to (c), then the answer
should be considered as Acceptable or better.
7.3 The most important question when concluding the overall result as a pass
or a failure would be “Would I employ the Candidate to work as a
qualified Quantity Surveyor with the ability to resolve problems in a
professional manner?”
Page 5
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS
8.0 GENERAL NOTES
8.1 This year’s questions are intended to test Candidates’ knowledge from a
wide spectrum of issues, with weight given to their associated and extended
thinking.
8.2 The Five Common Criteria (perception, imagination, technical skills,

judgment and communication) for assessing Candidates’ answers have
also been included in the Question Paper for Candidates’ attention.
9.0 NOTES TO CANDIDATES
9.1 Headings to questions are for ease of identification only and do not form
part of the questions.
9.2 The number of main questions is as follows:
(a) First day – Questions with varying marks totalling 50 marks

(b) Second day – Questions with varying marks but totalling 50 marks
DAY 1
Question No. 1 Cost Estimate 15 marks

Question No. 2 Cost Analysis 15 marks
Question No. 3 Bills of Quantities Editing 10 marks
Question No. 4 Contract Procurement 10 marks
---------------
50 marks
---------------
DAY 2
Question No. 1 Valuation of Variations 12 marks

Question No. 2 Disruption Claims 15 marks
Question No. 3 Site Possession 10 marks
Question No. 4 Nominated Sub-Contract 13 marks
---------------
50 marks
---------------
9.3 All Main Questions and Sub-Questions are compulsory.
Page 6
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS
9.0 NOTES TO CANDIDATES (Cont’d)
9.4 The total mark of each day’s paper is 50. The passing mark of each day’s
paper is 55% of the total mark of that paper. Candidates who have
passed both days’ papers will be considered as having passed the APC
Practice Problems.
9.5 Refer also to INSTRUCTIONS TO CANDIDATES, which were issued to you

in advance.
10.0 FIVE COMMON CRITERIA
10.1 Candidates are expected to demonstrate a reasonable level of professional

competence against five common criteria outlined below, sufficient for the
Assessors to answer the question “Would I employ the Candidate to
work as a qualified Quantity Surveyor with the ability to resolve
problems in a professional manner?” However, it should be recognized
that not all these criteria apply to every problem, nor do they carry equal
weight.
(a) Perception: A full understanding of the problem posed, evidenced

by a response to each item in the question. Candidates should also
show foresight by anticipating additional problems not specifically
mentioned.
(b) Imagination: The assumption of essential supplementary

information so as to provide a full response; also the use of
imaginary telephone inquiries, quotations, notes, etc.
(c) Technical skills: The correct use of measurement principles, prices,

discount factors, etc. The use of appropriate short cuts, rounding off
of figures, etc. to suit the scale of the problem. The provision of
analysis to a depth appropriate to the stage reached by Candidates
and the time constraints imposed on Candidates.
(d) Judgement: The provision of sound professional advice indicative of

professional knowledge and experience gained by Candidates. The
advice should be firm and unhesitating, except where suitable
caveats are essential.
(e) Communication: Free of ambiguity, with clear expression and an

absence of irrelevant or inappropriate technical details, particularly
when provided to a lay Employer. Correct syntax and good
professional style in letters and reports are important. Candidates
should clearly convey their interpretations and proposals.
Page 7
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Abbreviations
The following abbreviations used in the Notes to Assessors mean:
SFBC 2005 Agreement & Schedule of Conditions of Building Contract for

use in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Private
Edition - With Quantities 2005 Edition
SFBC 2006 Agreement & Schedule of Conditions of Building Contract for

use in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Private
Edition - Without Quantities 2006 Edition
GCC 1999 General Conditions of Contract for Building Works 1999 Edition
published by the Government of the Hong Kong Special
Administrative Region.
Candidates should clearly state the standard form of contract upon which their
answers are based.
Page 8
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS
DAY 1
18th SEPTEMBER 2018
Page 9
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Question No. 1 – Cost Estimate
You are the in-house quantity surveyor of property owner Hubbo. Hubbo is
planning to refurbish its existing industrial building in Kowloon Bay to attract more
affordable tenants. The whole building will be vacated before refurbishment.
The schematic design of G/F, 1/F and 2/F was reviewed this morning between
Hubbo and the designer. The following two proposals i.e. P1 and P2 have been
identified for further study:
P1. Add two pairs of escalators connecting G/F, 1/F and 2/F to attract F&B
tenants and convert the areas around the escalators to public foyers on the
three floors. Refer to Attachment A showing the proposed changes. The
storey height is 6.5m for G/F and 5m for 1/F and 2/F. There is no basement.
Further upgrade to the building services main equipment or service mains is

not required. Modern but not extravagant finishes are to be used. New
building services installations are to be installed there. Refurbishment costs
beyond the public foyers or on the façade can be excluded.
You are required to estimate the cost implication of this proposal. You may
need to talk to the designer for further details. Record any backup
discussions or assumptions.
[10 marks]
P2. Build a footbridge 15m long x 4m wide on 2/F across road to connect to an
existing commercial development also owned by Hubbo and having a
connectable lobby also on 2/F. You are required to prepare a query list of 10
items to clarify the choices of design and scope of work which may affect the
costs very differently, and deserve attention for discussion with the Project
Director and the designer. Cost estimate is not required at this moment. It
would be premature to ask for structural member sizes.
[5 marks]
Please write an email to your Project Director furnishing your advice.

[total 15 marks]
Page 10
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Question No. 1 – Cost Estimate (Cont’d)
Attachment A - Proposed Changes (layout not changed except as indicated)
Page 11
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS

NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Objective
The objective of this question is to test Candidates’ ability to:
 Identify the work required to add escalators and provide modern public foyers,
and prepare cost estimate with sufficient account for the work assumed; and
 Raise queries to identify the choices between different designs of a footbridge

which may affect the costs very differently, with foresight of the ancillary
alterations and additions to the existing, and the complexities which may be
encountered.
Cost Estimate for P1 – Add two pairs of escalators connecting G/F, 1/F and 2/F
and convert surrounding areas to public foyers
Candidates are expected to include in the cost estimate the following:
Item Description Order of

Costs
HK$M
a. Breaking up existing G/F, 1/F and 2/F slabs to form 0.30 ~ 0.50
escalator voids
 Smaller pits with excavation in G/F slabs

 Bigger voids in 1/F and 2/F slabs
 No. x rate or area x rate
 Bonus marks if consideration given to the effect on
existing substructure and underground services
 Bonus marks if more notes given about the method
of demolition, e.g. coring or saw cutting, provision of
temporary strutting
b. Removal of all existing services and finishes no longer 0.10 ~ 0.20

required
 Floor area x rate
c. Escalator pit in G/F slabs and pits in 1/F and 2/F slabs 0.20 ~ 0.30
 No. x rate for different pits
Page 12
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS

NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Item Description Order of

Costs
HK$M
d. Structural strengthening work 0.20 ~ 0.30
 Reinforced concrete or steel beams (with
fireproofing)
 Around openings with main beams taking support
from existing structural frames
 Starter bars, dowels, studs, brackets, drilling,
grouting, treatment of edge of slabs
 Beam length x rate
e. Internal partitions with door openings 0.30 ~ 0.40

 High ceiling height to be considered
 Fire rated may be required
 Openings with doors or doors by tenants
 G/F, 15m long x 6.5m high = 98m2
 1/F & 2/F, 17m long x 5m high x 2 = 170m2
 Area x rate for wall
 No. x rate for openings
f. Railings to escalator voids 0.15 ~ 0.20
 On 2 floors
 Glass or metal, with curbs
 Length 8.5m x 2 x 2 levels x rate
g. Smoke curtains or fire shutters to escalator voids 0.25 ~ 0.40
 Gross area (8.5 + 2.5)m x 2 girth x (6 + 4.5 x 2)m

high x rate
h. Finishes and sundry features to public foyers 0.70 ~ 0.90

 Floors, walls, ceilings - many choices
 False ceilings lower than structural ceilings
 Correspondingly lower wall finishes height
 On 3 floors
Page 13
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS

NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Ite Description Order of

m Costs HK$M
i. Escalators 3.20 ~ 4.00
 4 No.
 Longer escalators on G/F
j. Lighting and power, air conditioning, fire sprinklers, public 1.50 ~ 2.50
address, CCTV
Sub-total 6.90 ~ 9.70

k. Preliminaries (10% ~ 15%) 0.69 ~ 1.46
 Bonus marks if consideration given to temporary
protection, working platform, traffic diversions,
excavation permit if required, etc.
l. Contingencies (10% on the above) 0.76 ~ 1.12

Total 8.35 ~ 12.28
Say 8.40 ~ 12.30
Bonus marks if records given of discussions with the designer to support the
assumptions.
Composite items with approximate quantities x rates are preferred to lump sums
only.
Bonus marks if build-up of composite rates given.
Detailed listing of all work like a Bill of Quantities is not expected and in fact not
recommended.
Rounding off is welcome.
Bonus marks if statements of exclusions given.

Bonus marks if impact on the rest of the refurbishment project given.
[10 marks]
Page 14
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS

NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Cost Estimate for P2 – Build a footbridge of 15m long x 4m on 2/F across road to
connect to an existing commercial development
The items to be raised for discussions/clarifications may be:
Footbridge itself
1. Dimension of footbridge – Length, width, own height, and height above

road?
2. Construction method – Prefabricated or in-situ? Night lifting?
3. Bridge structure – Structural form? Reinforced concrete or steel? Columns

from streets required? Extent if so required?
4. Staircases – Any? Numbers and construction types?
5. Roof – Roofed or not roofed, green roof, metal cladding or no finishes?
6. Elevations - Open with railings or fully enclosed? Materials and type? If fully
enclosed, air conditioning and additional fire services protection required.
7. Finishes – Any special types and standard of finishes to floors, walls,

columns, ceilings and underside of the footbridge over the normal?
8. Special lighting and advertising signs - Any?
9. M&E services – Any special provisions over the normal? Extension distance
from main services in existing buildings?
Existing buildings
10. Foundations – Any modifications required? How extensive?
11. Structure – Any structural strengthening required? How to provide end

supports to the footbridge? Extent of such end supports?
12. Elevations – special provisions other than forming openings and jointing?
Fire or security shutters?
13. Foyers – extent of alterations and additions to the connected foyers?
Page 15
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS

NOTES TO ASSESSORS
The following would appear to be normal for a footbridge:
1. Statutory approvals – time and chance of obtaining planning, bridge and

traffic approvals.
2. Traffic diversion - during the construction.
3. Night work - required to lift the bridge girders and trusses.
Items are expected to have more encompassing scope and depth. An item like
“Type of floor finishes.” would be considered as too light.
[5 marks]
[total 15 marks]
Page 16
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Question No. 2 – Cost Analysis
Developer Bumba recently won a land bid for a commercial site. Bumba is going
to develop it into an office building – Project X. Bumba has just appointed your
firm as the consultant QS.
Project X particulars:
 Site area = 2,000m2
 No. of storeys = 40 (no basement)
 Typical floor-to-floor height = 4.2m
 Typical floor area = 1,500m2
You are required to respond to the email below from Bumba’s Commercial
Manager.
Dear QS,
The design team is studying two structural frame options: A) In-situ reinforced
concrete frame; and B) Composite steel frame i.e. steel columns and beams with
in-situ reinforced concrete core. Pre-stressing or post-tensioning is not considered
at this moment.
1. Please estimate the structural cost difference between these two options.
Please show your build-up of the elemental cost per m2 construction floor area
(CFA) with assumptions in the absence of structural design information. The
effects on the substructure and foundations can be excluded.
Project S is another project which is a reinforced concrete office building.

Project S and Project X are very similar in terms of CFA, no. of storeys, typical
floor area and floor height.
Attachment S is the BQ extracted from the Main Contract of Project S for your
estimation of structural option A. The BQ quantities have no error but the rates
would need careful review.
[10 marks]
2. Apart from the structural frame, please advise on the very different impacts of
using composite steel frame instead of reinforced concrete frame on the rest of
the construction costs and procurement.
[5 marks]
Thanks.
CM Lee
[total 15 marks]
Page 17
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Page 18
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Page 19
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Page 20
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Page 21
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Page 22
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Page 23
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Page 24
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Page 25
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Question No. 2 – Cost Analysis (Cont’d)

NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Objective
The objective of this question is to test:
 Candidates’ knowledge of structural ratios and market rates for key

components of common structural forms of office buildings in Hong Kong. It
requires Candidates to analyze the available BQ of another project and apply
the useful data to the structural cost estimation.
 Candidates’ knowledge of the impacts of using composite steel frame instead

of in-situ reinforced concrete frame on other construction costs and
procurement.
Item 1 – Elemental costs per CFA of the two structural systems
Candidates should firstly work out the approximate structural ratios from the BQ of
Project S. Please see Appendix 1 to Notes to Assessors. Candidates should
exclude the substructure works and the non-structural walls or work.
Obviously, pile caps, ground beams and beds are to be excluded. It is also
reasonable to assume that the 100mm thick walls in the BQ are non-structural
walls to be excluded. 150mm thick walls may or may not be. Good Candidates
should state doubt and make assumptions. The other walls are structural walls. It
is straightforward to work out the concrete ratio per floor area after making
reasonable exclusions.
The associated formwork is not measured separately. Candidates should be able

to estimate the formwork quantity of the structural walls from their concrete
volumes and thicknesses. A quicker way is by deducting the non-structural walls’
formwork from the total formwork to walls.
The steel bar reinforcement in the BQ is given as a single item presumably

including general bars, stirrups and binders to all reinforced concrete work.
Candidates should estimate the reinforcement ratio of the structural frame by first
deducting the reinforcement of pile caps, ground beams, beds and non-structural
walls from the BQ quantities. Candidates are expected to state reasonable
assumptions on the reinforcement ratio(s) of the items deducted.
Page 26
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS

NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Market rates based on recent tenders are normally used for pricing common
structural items. However, the BQ rates might contain irregularities due to
contractor’s pricing strategy or other project specific issues. They should therefore
be rationalized before use. Project S BQ rates were tendered for in 1Q2014. It
may be too crude to use published Tender Price Index to adjust to the present.
Recent reasonable market rates should be used. If the Candidate chose to use
Project S BQ rates, he should demonstrate the adjustment to the rates for the
difference in the price levels between the two projects. The formwork rates in the
given BQ after published Tender Price Index adjustments would be still quite low.
If the Candidate simply adjusted all rates by considering only the difference in
published Tender Price Index, his answer should be marked down. No published
Tender Price Index has been given to the Candidates. They may make sensible
assumptions as appropriate.
An elemental cost build-up of the two structural options is shown as follows:
A) In-situ reinforced concrete structure
Assumptions based on Project S Unit Rate HK$/m2

structural ratios HK$ CFA
Reinforced concrete 0.48m3/m2 CFA; grade C45 1,500/m3 720
to beams, slabs and
structural walls
Reinforced concrete 0.07m3/m2 CFA; grade C60 1,800/m3 126

to columns
Formwork 2.5m2/m2 CFA 500/m2 1,250
Rebar 0.55m3/m2 x 240kg/m3 9/kg 1,188
Miscellaneous 5% 164
Total 3,448
Page 27
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS

NOTES TO ASSESSORS
B) Composite steel structure
Assumptions Unit Rate HK$/m2

HK$ CFA
Structural steel 100kg/m2 CFA 35/kg 3,500
Fireproof coating to 1.5m2/m2 CFA; cementitious 400/m2 600

steel type fire protection, mainly to
steel beams
Metal decking 0.85m2/m2 CFA 800/m2 680
outside core
Reinforced concrete 0.36m3/m2 CFA; including core 1,500/m3 540
walls, column casing, topping
on metal decking
Formwork 1.25m2/m2 CFA 500/m2 625
Rebar 0.36m3/m2 x 160kg/m3 9/kg 518
Miscellaneous 5% 323
Total 6,786
Preliminaries and contingencies excluded.
As alternatives to concrete casing to columns, steel columns should either be

enclosed with fire protection board or coated with fire protection material and
enclosed with drywall or cladding. Overall, the costs of these alternatives would
be higher.
It is common practice to add allowance for miscellaneous structural items.

However, Assessors should not mark down Candidates’ answers without this item
as it is minor and does not change the relative cost difference between the two
options.
While different calculated approaches to arriving at the cost per CFA are
acceptable, the use of structural ratios backed up with some calculations and
assumptions should be the quickest.
Page 28
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS

NOTES TO ASSESSORS
The structural ratios for the in-situ reinforced concrete option should be based on
those of Project S. The structural ratios for concrete work for the composite steel
structure option should preferably be by pro-rata from Project S otherwise the
differences may not be easily justified.
Based on the above build-up, the cost of composite steel frame is around 120%
higher than the cost of the in-situ reinforced concrete frame. It is considered
acceptable if the Candidate’s estimate of the difference is up to 140%.
[10 marks]
Item 2 – Impacts of using composite steel frame instead of in-situ reinforced

concrete frame on other construction costs and procurement
Apart from the structural cost, there could be impacts on the following:
1. Foundations – Lighter because the overall building self-weight is lighter.
2. Walls – More non-structural walls to replace the structural walls outside the
core. More floor, wall and ceiling finishing areas created due to thinner walls.
Junctions between non-structural walls and partitions with fireproof coated
steel columns and beams and with corrugated metal decking need special
treatment.
3. Columns – Smaller columns. If concrete encased, slight increase in areas of

floor finishes and ceiling finishes, and decrease in area of finishes to columns.
If not concrete encased, more drywalls or cladding required to cover up the
fireproof coated steel columns.
4. Metal decking – The interfacing details between corrugated metal decking and
beams or columns and around edges must be carefully thought out before
procurement to avoid variations.
5. Hangers for architectural work and M&E works – Hangers fixed to steel beams
or concrete slabs on steel decks would be by welding or special bolting.
Hangers fixed to fireproof coated steel beams would also need fireproof
coating.
6. Openings – Openings in steel members must be fixed before prefabrication of

the steel members otherwise variation costs would be significant.
Page 29
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS

NOTES TO ASSESSORS
7. Procurement – Steel frame, metal decking and fireproofing would involve

additional kinds of sub-contractors whether domestic or nominated. Due to the
long lead time for design, statutory approval and material procurement, the
tendering for the steel frames may need to be handled earlier than the
commencement of the superstructure or even the foundations.
8. Design – The design of the steel frames must therefore be frozen very early for
tendering and in any case before prefabrication. Subsequent design changes
are usually costlier than changes to reinforced concrete structure.
9. Programme – Pure steel structure should be faster, but concrete core of

composite steel structure and concrete casing to steel columns are on the
critical path thus making it not much faster. Architectural trades may not be
able to follow as closely as in a reinforced concrete framed construction.
10. Plant – Special cranes must be used for the erection of the steel members.
They may not be continued to be useful after the erection of the structure.
Other cranes may need to be used.
Candidates’ answer covering 70% of the points above warrants full mark.
[5 marks]
Please see Appendix 1 following this page.
[total 15 marks]
Page 30
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS

NOTES TO ASSESSORS
APPENDIX 1
Estimate of concrete, rebar and formwork ratios for Option A

Concrete
m3/m2 CFA
Concrete Grade C45D/20
walls; 250mm thick 2,134 m3
walls; 500mm thick 3,087 m3 0.146
suspended slabs; 150mm thick 1,446 m3
suspended slabs; 200mm thick 9,980 m3 0.179
beams 9,650 m3 0.151
steps and staircases 459 m3 0.007
30,867 m3
Concrete ratio = 30,867m3/64,000m2 0.48 m3/m2 CFA
Concrete Grade C60D/20

columns 4,523 m3 0.071
Concrete ratio = 4,523m3/64,000m2 0.07 m3/m2 CFA
Total concrete volume 35,390 m3
Rebar
Total 9,068,980 kg
Concrete volume of pile caps, ground beams,

non-structural walls and beds
pile caps 1,153 m3
ground beams 116 m3
walls; 100mm thick 679 m3
Beds; 200mm thick 334 m3
Total concrete 3,364 m3
Assume rebar ratio (150kg/m3) x 150 kg/m3
Total rebar of pile caps, ground beams, non-
structural walls and beds 504,600 kg
Remaining rebar = 9,068,980kg - 504,600kg 8,564,380 kg

Rebar rato = 8,564,380kg/35,390m3 242 kg/m3
say 240 kg/m3
Page 31
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS

NOTES TO ASSESSORS
APPENDIX 1 (Cont’d)
Estimate of concrete, rebar and formwork ratios for Option A (Cont’d)

Formwork m2/m2 CFA
Flat soffits of slabs 54,429
Sloping surfaces; soffits of slabs 2,345 0.887
Vertical surfaces; columns 17,732 0.277
Vertical surfaces; walls
250mm thick; 2134m3 / 0.25 x 2 17,072
500mm thick; 3087m3 / 0.5 x 2 12,348 0.657
650mm thick; 4111 m3 / 0.65 x 2 12,649
Vertical sides and flat soffits of beams 37,469 0.585
Edges of slab and walls; over 300mm wide 1,645
Ditto; n.e. 300mm wide; 7744m x 0.3m 2,323
Risers; n.e. 300mm wide; 3845m x 0.3m 1,154 0.093
Open strings to stairs; 2816m x 0.3m 845
160,011
Formwork ratio = 160,011m2 / 64,000m2 2.50 m2/m2 CFA
Page 32
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS

NOTES TO ASSESSORS
APPENDIX 1 (Cont’d)
Estimate of concrete, rebar and formwork ratios for Option B

Concrete
Assume all concrete grade C45D/20

Walls; assume design same as Option A 0.146
Slabs; instead of 200mm slab, assume a
120mm concrete topping on metal deck ie
(1446m3+9980x120/200)m3/64000m2 0.116
Beams; most replaced by steel beams, say 0.030
Columns; smaller using steel by say 20% 0.057
Sundries; same as Option A 0.007
0.356
Say 0.36 m3/m2 CFA
Rebar
With steel columns and beams, the rebar ratio
should be reduced significantly, say overall 160 kg/m3
Formwork
Slabs; allow for slab mainly inside RC core, say 0.150
Columns; smaller than Option A say by 20% 0.222
Walls; same as Option A 0.657
Beams; most replaced by steel beams, say 0.120
Sundries; same as Option A 0.093
1.242
Say 1.25 m2/m2 CFA
Page 33
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Question No. 3 – Bills of Quantities Editing
You are the consultant QS of a project for the construction of a proposed

landscaped walkway over 4,800 m2 site area in Kwun Tong. The Tender
Documents are to be issued on 21 September 2018. The tender shall be “Lump
Sum” with BQ for executing the Works in accordance with the Contract.
Your subordinates have completed the attached draft Bill No. 3. The piling and
excavation works are subject to remeasurement. Please edit and bulk check the
bill with reference to HKSMM4 (without amendments by Preambles) and give the
marked copy and/or separate notes to your subordinates for discussion.
[10 marks]
Page 34
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS
BILL NO. 3
LANDSCAPED WALKWAY
Item Description Quantity Unit Rate Amount
BILL NO. 3
LANDSCAPED WALKWAY
Notes
1. Finishes and waterproofing to walkway
are measured under Bill No. 4;
2. Electrical and fire services installations
(except external lighting pole
and fittings) are measured separately.
PILING
PRE-BORED SOCKETED STEEL H-PILES
Plant
Providing and assembling on the Site and

the subsequent dismantling and removal
A Piling equipment - Set
Boring
Boring the pile holes
B Steel H-piles; 305 x 305 x 323 kg/m; 140 m

not exceeding 10.00 m long
(In 14 No.)
C Steel H-piles; 305 x 305 x 223 kg/m; raking 20 m

total length in stages of 10.00 - 15.00 m
long (In 4 No.)
Permanent steel casings
Supply and install steel casings for
D Steel H-piles; 305 x 305 x 323 kg/m; 35 m

(In 4 No.)
E Steel H-piles; 305 x 305 x 223 kg/m; raking 145 m

(In 4 No.)
Page 35
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS
BILL NO. 3
LANDSCAPED WALKWAY
Supplying, handling, transporting, pitching,

driving and withdrawing steel casings;
boring or excavation; including removal of
underground obstructions; removal of bored
or excavated materials
A Steel H-piles; 305 x 305 x 223 kg/m; 906 m

(In 14 No.)
B Steel H-piles; 305 x 305 x 223 kg/m; raking 175 m

not exceeding 15 degrees from vertical
(In 4 No.)
Grouting
Grouting to pile holes for
C Steel H-piles; 305 x 305 x 223 kg/m; 194 m

(In 14 No.)
D Steel H-piles; 305 x 305 x 223 kg/m; raking 69 m

(In 4 No.)
Capping plates to pile heads
Steel plates
E Size 600 x 600 x 60 mm thick (In 8 No.) 1,355 kg
Reinforcing starter bars to pile heads
Ribbed steel reinforcing bars;

general reinforcement
F 45 mm diameter 6,591 kg
Pile head treatments

Cutting off heads of pile; straightening or
bending and cleaning projecting
reinforcement; removing debris from site
G 219 mm diameter 18 nr
Page 36
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS
BILL NO. 3
LANDSCAPED WALKWAY
PILE CAPS
EXCAVATION (ALL PROVISIONAL)
Excavating
Excavation for pile caps; commencing at

existing ground level; including temporary
shoring and supports
3
A 1.50 - 3.00 m deep 143 m
Filling
Excavated material
B backfilling to excavation; depositing

3
and compacting in 300mm thick layers 73 m
Disposal
Surplus excavated material
C removing from site to approved

3
dumping area 80 m
CONCRETE WORKS
IN-SITU CONCRETE
Concrete; grade 20/20
Blinding under foundations and beams
2
D 75 mm thick 10 m
Page 37
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS
BILL NO. 3
LANDSCAPED WALKWAY
Reinforced concrete; grade 25/20
3
A pile caps 157 m
3
B tie beams 76 m
3
C suspended slabs; 300mm thick 1,440 m
REINFORCEMENT
Ribbed steel reinforcing bars
General reinforcement
D 32 mm diameter in pile caps 4,512 kg
bar diameter of any size in tie beams

E 68,373 kg
and slabs
FORMWORK
Fair-faced formwork
Vertical surfaces
2
F pile caps 84 m
2
G sides of tie beams and slabs 73 m
Flat surfaces
2
H soffits of suspended slabs 9,600 m
Page 38
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS
BILL NO. 3
LANDSCAPED WALKWAY
PLASTERING AND PAVING (INTERNALLY)
Spatterdash
2
A concrete floor surfaces 4,800 m
Worked surface finishes on concrete
2
B finished with steel trowelled floor 4,800 m
STEEL AND METAL WORKS
Sundries
C External lighting fittings "SF2" with 4 nr

stainless steel mounting poles;
4.5m high; including excavating
trenches for pipe ducts, footing,
concrete beds, armoured cables
and backfilling
To Summary HK$
[10 marks]
Page 39
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Question No. 3 – Bills of Quantities Editing (Cont’d)

NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Objective
The objective of this question is to test Candidates’ knowledge of the SMM rules
and ability in bulk checking the BQ item descriptions and quantities, which is a
fundamental competence to be expected from a qualified QS.
Page 40
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Question No. 3 – Bills of Quantities Editing (Cont’d) BILL NO. 3

NOTES TO ASSESSORS LANDSCAPED WALKWAY
BILL NO. 3
LANDSCAPED WALKWAY
Why “Plastering and
Notes Paving” is included later in
1. Finishes and waterproofing to walkway this Bill?
are measured under Bill No. 4;
2. Electrical and fire services installations
(except external lighting pole
and fittings) are measured separately. “ALL PROVISIONAL”?
PILING SMM Section V(e).9

Any items for trial piles?
PRE-BORED SOCKETED STEEL H-PILES
Unit “Set” not defined in
SMM;
Plant SMM Section V(e).1 in
unit “Item”;
Providing and assembling on the Site and Quantity against
the subsequent dismantling and removal “Item” should be left
blank instead of “-”.
A Piling equipment - Set
SMM Section V(e).2.*.S.1
Requirements regarding
Boring disposal of the spoil not
stated
Boring the pile holes
Inconsistent kg/m for

B Steel H-piles; 305 x 305 x 323 kg/m; 140 m
steel H-piles of the same
not exceeding 10.00 m long sectional size?
(In 14 No.)
SMM Section V(e).2.1.1.1
C Steel H-piles; 305 x 305 x 223 kg/m; raking 20 m degree of rake not stated
total length in stages of 10.00 - 15.00 m
long (In 4 No.) Sizes of pile holes SMM Section V(e).2.1.1
and thicknesses of Total length of raking pile
Permanent steel casings casings not stated shaft ≤ 10.00 m not
stated
Supply and install steel casings for
D Steel H-piles; 305 x 305 x 323 kg/m 35 m SMM Section V(e).2.1.1 &
(In 4 No.) 2
Total length of raking pile
E Steel H-piles; 305 x 305 x 223 kg/m; raking 145 m shaft ≤ 10.00 m and in
not exceeding 15 degrees from vertical further stage of 5.00 m
(In 4 No.) not stated
Mismatch between numbers of Pile casing longer than pile
pile holes and pile casing? holes?
Page 41
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS

NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Supplying, handling, transporting, pitching, SMM Sections V(f).2,

driving and withdrawing steel casings; V(f).3 and V(f).4
Supplying, handling steel
boring or excavation; including removal of
piles, transporting and
underground obstructions; removal of bored pitching the piles, and
or excavated materials driving piles should be
measured separately;
A Steel H-piles; 305 x 305 x 223 kg/m; 906 m withdrawing steel casings
(In 14 No.) (temporary) in conflict
with permanent steel
B Steel H-piles; 305 x 305 x 223 kg/m; raking 175 m casings measured above
(In 4 No.)
SMM Section Piles so much longer?
V(f).9.*.S.2
Grouting Grouting materials
Notwithstanding the
not stated
Grouting to pile holes for difference in numbers,
why total lengths of pile
C Steel H-piles; 305 x 305 x 223 kg/m; 194 m holes, casing, piles and
grouting so different?
(In 14 No.)
D Steel H-piles; 305 x 305 x 223 kg/m; raking 69 m

not exceeding 15 degrees from vertical Grouting longer than pile
(In 4 No.) holes?
Capping plates to pile heads
Steel plates
E Size 600 x 600 x 60 mm thick (In 8 No.) 1,355 kg Only 8 No. capping plates
to 18 No. piles?
and hence any effect to
Reinforcing starter bars to pile heads the quantity, weight of
steel plates?
Ribbed steel reinforcing bars;
general reinforcement 40 mm diameter?
as there is no 45 mm
F 45 mm diameter 6,591 kg diameter steel reinforcing
bars
and hence any effect to
Pile head treatments
the quantity, weight of
Cutting off heads of pile; straightening or reinforcing bars?
bending and cleaning projecting
reinforcement; removing debris from site SMM Section V(f).8
Length to be cut-off
G 219 mm diameter 18 nr missing
SMM Sections V(e).10, V.(e)12 Items for test loading of piles, concrete coring test for
testing founding level and proving bedrock missing
Page 42
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS

PILE CAPS No breaking up existing

paving before excavation
EXCAVATION (ALL PROVISIONAL) and subsequent
reinstatement?
Excavating SMM Section VI(a)5.1
Temporary shoring and
Excavation for pile caps; commencing at supports should
existing ground level; including temporary be measured separately
shoring and supports SMM Section VI(a)3.4.1
Item for excavating for
3
A 1.50 - 3.00 m deep 143 m tie beams;
“not exceeding 1.50 m
Filling deep” missing
SMM Section VI(a)3.4.1

Excavated material “not exceeding 1.50 m
deep” missing
B backfilling to excavation; depositing
3
and compacting in 300mm thick layers 73 m
Disposal
Surplus excavated material

143 m3 - 73 m3
= 70 m3
C removing from site to approved
3
Volume of earthwork not
dumping area 80 m balanced
CONCRETE WORKS
IN-SITU CONCRETE
Concrete; grade 20/20
Blinding under foundations and beams

SMM Section VII(a).11
2 Unit should be in “m3”
D 75 mm thick 10 m
Blinding under pile caps and tile beams to be exact?
Page 43
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS

Reinforced concrete; grade 25/20 Such low grade 25/20 for

structural members?
3
A pile caps 157 m
3
B tie beams 76 m
Any suspended beams?
3
C suspended slabs; 300mm thick 1,440 m
REINFORCEMENT
Double check reinforcement quantities
if not provisional;
Ribbed steel reinforcing bars The steel ratios are unreasonably low:
4,512 kg / 157 m3
= 29 kg / m3
General reinforcement 68,373 kg / (76 + 1,440) m3
= 45 kg / m3
D 32 mm diameter in pile caps 4,512 kg
SMM Section VII (c)2.1
E bar diameter of any size in tie beams 68,373 kg Nominal size of bar
SMM VII (c)2.1.3 reinforcement not stated
Item for links, stirrups and
binders missing
FORMWORK Review as fair-faced
formwork not normally
Fair-faced formwork used for pile caps, tie
beams and slabs below
ground level.
Vertical surfaces
2
F pile caps 84 m
Why formwork to sides of
G sides of tie beams and slabs 73 2 slabs?
m
Edge formwork?
Suspended slabs?
Flat surfaces
Review if left-in formwork
H soffits of suspended slabs 9,600 m
2 should be used for
Review the quantity of soffit suspended ground floor
formwork as it is double the slabs.
area of concrete floor measured
below.
Page 44
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS

PLASTERING AND PAVING (INTERNALLY) Should be EXTERNALLY

for landscaped deck
Spatterdash Spatterdash should not

be applied to floor
A concrete floor surfaces 4,800 m
2 surfaces.
Worked surface finishes on concrete Trowelled finish directly on

concrete surfaces before
2 setting should be called
B finished with steel trowelled floor 4,800 m “Concrete sundries” or
billed immediately after
the relevant concrete
items.
STEEL AND METAL WORKS
This item is not considered as a sundry item
Sundries under SMM Section XV(h).
C External lighting fittings "SF2" with 4 nr

stainless steel mounting poles;
4.5m high; including excavating Should it better be called
a lighting pole with
trenches for pipe ducts, footing,
fittings?
concrete beds, armoured cables Agreeable to bundle as
and backfilling one item under “Lighting
poles”
To Summary HK$
Candidates who rightly pointed out 70% of the above remarks warrant full mark.
[10 marks]
Page 45
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Question No. 4 – Contract Procurement
You are the consultant QS of a 2-storey warehouse development in Tai Po. The
procurement approach is intended to be lump sum contract based on drawings
and specification, with payment to the Contractor on a milestone basis. Tender
documents have been prepared and are ready for tendering.
The Employer has set a tight time frame for completing the development.
Furthermore, the budget for the development is tight and it is difficult for the
Employer to raise additional finance if the budget is exceeded. Accordingly, the
design consultants and you have already worked together to arrive at a completed
and cost-effective design for the development.
In order to ensure the development be completed within the tight budget and on
time, the Project Manager has just recommended the Employer to change the
current contractual arrangement by adopting target cost contract with a pre-
determined pain/gain share arrangement.
The Project Manager believes that cost savings and early completion can be
achieved if target cost contract is adopted, and accordingly the development can
be completed within the tight budget and timeframe.
Having said that, the Employer is unsure whether the said benefits of using target
cost contract is applicable to the warehouse development and would like you to
advise on the following in the form of a letter:
(a) Additional requirements to be included under the current tender documents if

target cost contract is adopted; and
[5 marks]
(b) Your recommendation on whether target cost contract should be adopted for
this warehouse development.
[5 marks]
[total 10 marks]
Page 46
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Question No. 4 – Contract Procurement (Cont’d)

NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Objective
The objective of this question is to test Candidates’ understanding of target cost

contract and its applicability under the current development. The answers should
be given in the form of a letter.
Additional requirements to be included under the current tender documents if

target cost contract is adopted
“cost” here refers to the costs to the Contractor, not the costs to the Employer.
The following are additional requirements to be included under the current tender
documents if target cost contract is adopted:
(a) Type of contract – This is a target cost contract based on reimbursement of

actual costs plus a fee.
(b) Target cost – A pre-determined target cost or a mechanism for fixing the
target cost based on the tenderer’s estimate of the costs will be stated.
(Bonus point: The target cost plus Contractor’s fee and the Employer’s
contingencies for permissible adjustments to the target cost should be less
than the maximum budget. The target cost itself should contain an
allowance for changes not permissible to adjust the target cost.)
(c) Adjustment of target cost – Circumstances that the target cost will be
adjusted will be specified. The normal definitions of variations and events
leading to loss and expense compensation under a lump sum contract will
be reduced. “Variations” will usually be defined to mean a change of the
scope of the Works only, excluding any necessary changes to complete the
Works.
(d) Fee – The tenderers will be asked to quote their percentage fees or lump
sum fees or a combination of both, with or without the benefit of a cost
estimate. The percentage fee will be expressed as a mark-up on the actual
costs, and may be calculated on a sliding scale. The fee can be specified
to include lump sum preliminaries, lump sum attendance, percentage
overheads and profit. A definition of what should be included in the
preliminaries, attendance and overheads will be stated.
(e) Pain/gain share – Apart from the fee, a pre-determined formula to calculate
the pain/gain share of the difference between the final actual costs and the
target cost will be stated. The pain/gain share may be of a sliding scale. A
cost cap may also be set so that any cost overrun beyond the target cost by
a certain percentage is not reimbursable to the Contractor.
Page 47
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS

NOTES TO ASSESSORS
(f) Contractor’s cost saving proposal – Any cost saving proposal by the
Contractor will not be regarded as variations and will have no effect on the
target price so as to encourage the Contractor to suggest cost saving
proposals. The cost saving proposals must be agreeable to the Employer.
(g) Payment – The Contractor will be reimbursed the actual costs supported by
an open book cost accounting system.
(h) Definition of ‘Cost’ and ‘Fee’–What can be and cannot be included in the
actual costs to be reimbursed will be clearly stated. The definitions of ‘Cost’
and ‘Fee’ will be complementary with one of them to contain a catch-all
statement that any cost not falling into one will be deemed to be included in
the other.
(i) Cost estimate – The tenderers may be required to submit an estimate of the
costs based on the drawings and specification. The estimated total cost
plus fee and contingencies may become the target cost. The breakdown
will serve post contract monitoring of the actual costs. The rates will be
used to value cost adjustment to the target cost. It is possible that no cost
estimate is expressly mentioned. In any case, the Contractor will be
obliged to submit cost estimate and regular financial reports during the post
contract stage.
(j) Subletting – A mechanism will be specified such that the Contractor’s

expenditure admissible to the actual costs will be subject to competitive
tendering conducted by the Contractor where the selected suppliers and
sub-contractors and the awarded prices must be approved by the Employer.
A cost threshold invoking tendering may be specified. (Bonus point:
However, this may delay the programme.)
(k) Partnering encouragement – Partnering measures may be specified to

encourage joint resolution of problems with a view to achieve the desired
quality below the target cost and complete on time. (Bonus point: Target
cost contract requires a higher level of co-operation between the Employer
and the Contractor so as to drive the Contractor to innovate, save costs,
work efficiently and solve problems as the project proceeds. Accordingly,
measures to promote partnering should be stated in the contract, for
example, partnering workshop, setting up a partnering charter,
encouragement of joint discussions and resolution of problems, etc.)
Page 48
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS

NOTES TO ASSESSORS
(l) Bonus point: Lump sum price arrangement - It is also possible that the
tenderers are required to give a lump sum price based on the drawings and
specification plus some contingencies to become a target price. Adjustment
of the lump sum price will resemble the normal lump sum contract. The
only differences will be that Contractor’s cost saving proposal will be
permitted and pain/gain share mechanism will be in place.
[5 marks]
Your recommendation of whether target cost contract should be adopted for the
current development
Cost savings by adopting target cost contracts are mainly achieved by:
 Permitting the Contractor to propose cost saving proposals; and

 Relieving his risks and therefore his risk allowances over the suppliers’ and
sub-contractors’ prices which are not fixed at the time of the Contractor’s
tendering.
Early completion by adopting target cost contracts is mainly achieved by getting

the Contractor on board before the completion of the design.
For this project, it should be considered whether the above conditions exist.
Despite the design for the development is completed for the Contractor to
establish a realistic target cost, together with the inclusion of a cost cap so that
any budget overrun will be wholly borne by the Contractor, the adoption of target
cost contract is not recommended for the current development due to the following
reasons:
1. Unlikely to have any significant cost savings
(a) Design already completed – Given the completeness of the design, there
is little room for early contractor involvement to realize the potential of
cost savings by providing advice on buildability. Cost saving proposals
may likely downgrade the existing design.
(b) Simple project nature - Given the simplicity in nature of the development,
it is unlikely that the Contractor can suggest significant cost saving
proposals.
Page 49
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS

NOTES TO ASSESSORS
(c) Tight construction time frame – The already tight construction time frame
renders early completion of the development difficult. Any savings
related to site supervision cost are unlikely.
(d) Possibility of cost overrun – In view of the completeness of the design

and its simplicity in nature, the possibility of cost overrun is little.
2. Additional costs incurred by the Employer, the Consultants and the

Contractor
(a) Employer’s own costs - Extra costs will be required for arranging
trainings and partnering workshops to enhance the level of
understanding and cooperation between the Employer, the consultants
and the Contractor.
(b) Additional consultancy fee – The consultants may request for additional
fees, especially in providing more resources in checking the Contractor’s
open-book accounts against many invoices and receipts.
(c) Higher Contractor’s administration costs – As the Contractor will have to

account for the sub-letting process in a transparent manner to the
Employer, will need to obtain more approvals, and will need to operate
an open book accounting system, the administrative time spent will be
more than that on the normal lump sum contracts where the Contractor
can have autonomy to decide.
(d) Milestone payments – While it is still possible to use milestone payments,

it will not be as straightforward as to be used on lump sum contract
because there may not be confident lump sums readily available for the
milestone payments.
3. Delays to completion of the development
(a) Tender documents modification - Additional time will be required to

modify the existing tender documents which will further delay the overall
completion of the development.
(b) Pre-qualification of contractor – An inexperienced or claim conscious

contractor may jeopardize the target cost contracting process and not all
contractors have experience in operating a target cost contract. A pre-
qualification exercise may be required to shortlist contractors for
tendering. This may defer the whole tendering process.
Page 50
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS

NOTES TO ASSESSORS
4. Inherent risks of adopting target cost contract
(a) Cost certainty – The main concern of the Employer is cost certainty.
Target cost arrangement does not excel in offering cost certainty to the
Employer.
(b) Target setting – Incorrect target setting can drive a focus on raising the
target through claims rather than suggesting innovative savings.
(c) Risk sharing mechanism - It is not easy to derive a correct incentive

mechanism (the pain/gain formula) so as to drive the right behaviour of
the Contractor.
(d) Limited contract forms – There is limited number of standard forms of

contract using target cost. Ad-hoc drafting of contract clauses may lead
to misunderstanding of liabilities between the parties.
(e) Well suited to long term relationships – Use of target cost favours the
establishment of long term relationships but not for one-off project.
[5 marks]
[total 10 marks]
Page 51
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS
DAY 2
19th SEPTEMBER 2018
Page 52
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Question No. 1 – Valuation of Variations
You are the consultant QS of a sports centre project. The Employer has awarded
the piling and superstructure works under a single contract where the Works
(except the foundation works) are to be designed by the Architect while the
foundation works are to be designed by the Contractor. The Contract included a
set of Bills of Quantities for the superstructure part while the Contractor was
required to submit a lump sum price with quantity and rate breakdown for the
foundation works in the tender (refer to Attachment A for part of the breakdown).
At the tender stage, apart from the provision of a loading schedule for the piles to
support, the Project Structural Engineer has prepared a design for the piling and
incorporated the same as part of the Tender Booklet for tenderers' reference. The
piling design was marked “for reference only”, which comprised 200 No. 305 x 305
x 180 kg/m driven steel H piles with an average length of 35m.
One week after the Commencement of the Works, the Project Structural Engineer
issued a Site Instruction No. SE-002 to revise the loading schedule. The
Contractor, based on the revised loading schedule, prepared and submitted a
revised piling schedule.
At the following site meeting, the Contractor reported that the revised piling
schedule came up with 190 No. 305 x 305 x 180kg/m driven steel H piles with an
average length of 35m, and submitted a quotation for a net addition of $700,000 to
the Contract Sum (refer also to Attachment A).
The Project Structural Engineer subsequently carried out a check and agreed to
the Contractor's submitted revised design but has query about the cost implication
of the variation. In his opinion, the variation should result in a cost reduction for 10
No. of piles, when compared with the original design.
The Project Manager asks for your opinion on the above. You are required to
provide a contractual analysis and advise on the proper fact finding approach to
deal with the issue. The Project Manager is a meticulous person and would not be
satisfied with a simple broad-brush answer.
[12 marks]
Page 53
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Question No. 1 – Valuation of Variations (Cont’d)
Attachment A
Extract from the Contractor’s quantity and rate breakdown for foundation works in
the accepted tender:
Item Description Quantity Unit Rate ($) Total ($)

A 305 x 305 x 180 kg/m 7,000 m 4,000 28,000,000
Piles No. 1-200
Quotation for Site Instruction No. SE-002
Item Description Quantity Uni Rate ($) Total ($)

t
Omissions
A Driven steel H piles (305 x 6,475 m 4,000 (25,900,000)
305 x 180 kg/m)
= 185No. x 35m
Additions
B Driven steel H piles (305 x 6,650 m 4,000 26,600,000
305 x 180 kg/m)
= 190No. x 35m
C Nett addition 700,000
Page 54
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS

NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Objective
The objective of this question is to test Candidates’ understanding of (i) the

contractual implication of information incorporated into the Tender Documents
which are for reference only; and (ii) the approach to determine a proper baseline
for valuation of variation involving works of Contractor’s design.
Contractual Analysis
1. The Tender Documents were prepared based on the Architect's design with
Bills of Quantities, but the foundation works were required to be included in
the tender based on Contractor's design. The quantities estimated by the
Contractor based on his design and indicated in the lump sum price
breakdown for the foundation works shall not form part of the Contract.
2. The piling design prepared by the Project Structural Engineer though issued
to the Contractor for tendering was marked to be for reference only and
therefore does not form part of the Contract.
3. The mere fact that the Contractor’s quantities in the price breakdown match
nicely with the reference design prepared by the Project Structural Engineer
does not necessarily follow that the quantities or the reference design shall
form part of the Contract.
4. For the same Contract Sum, the Contractor shall be and shall only be
responsible for providing a piling design sufficient to support the building in
compliance with the original contract requirements. Any up or down errors
made in the preliminary design or in the estimated quantities or rates shall not
result in any adjustment to the Contract Sum or completion time.
5. Instead of comparing against the quantities stated in the price breakdown, the
variation shall be valued by comparing the piling design that has or would
have been prepared by the Contractor fulfilling the original contract
requirements, i.e. the baseline piling design based on the original loading
schedule, against the revised piling design based on the revised loading
schedule under Site Instruction No. SE-002.
6. The consequential changes to the rest of the foundations designed by the

Contractor should also be considered.
Page 55
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS

NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Suggested Approach
1. In order to compare between the original and the revised piling designs, it is
necessary to identify the “baseline design” which is the one fulfilling the
original contract requirements (i.e. the original loading schedule).
2. As part of the supporting information for his submitted quotation, the

Contractor should be requested to provide the “baseline design” as the
basis of the omission cost in the variation.
3. A preliminary design may have been submitted by the Contractor at the

tender stage but this usually would be regarded as for reference only.
However, it is advisable to check the Contract or, if the formal Contract
Documents have not been prepared yet, the correspondence exchanged
during the tender stage to see whether the Contractor has submitted any
piling design which has been agreed upon to form part of the Contract as
the baseline design. In the absence of an accepted baseline design before
the award of the Contract, the baseline design must be the one submitted
by the Contractor after the award of the Contract and accepted by the
Project Structural Engineer as fulfilling the original contract requirements.
4. If none baseline design has been submitted or if the previous design

submitted by the Contractor did not fulfil the original contract requirements,
the Contractor should be required to submit or re-submit the baseline
design for acceptance by the Project Structural Engineer as fulfilling the
original contract requirements.
5. Even though the acceptable design may result in fewer or lighter piles than
those stated in the lump sum price breakdown, the Project Structural
Engineer cannot insist on adding more piles. The baseline design so
accepted shall be used for the valuation of the variation as described
earlier.
6. The Project Structural Engineer should also be reminded to check the

implication on the pile caps and tie beams design so as to ensure that there
is no undue saving in piling costs at the expense of pile caps and tie beams
costs. The cost effects on the pile caps and tie beams should also be
considered as part of the variation. The principle as described for the piles
in respect of comparing between the designs before and after the loading
schedule revision should also apply to the pile caps and tie beams.
7. If the Contractor refuses to submit any baseline design, advice from the
Project Structural Engineer should be sought regarding a notional baseline
piling design for the purposes of valuation of the variation.
Page 56
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS
[12 marks]
Question No. 2 – Disruption Claims
You are the consultant QS of a commercial redevelopment project. Your Client’s

Project Manager, Mr. Chan has just received a claim for extension of time of 15
days and monetary compensation amounting to HK$500,000 for a series of
disruptions to the regular progress of the Contractor’s works. Mr. Chan considers
the claim unreasonable and superfluous and has written to you for your advice.
Mr. Chan’s email is given below: -
Hi,
I refer to the Contractor’s claim submitted last week claiming extension of time of
15 days and an extravagant amount of HK$500,000. Having studied the
Contractor’s submission, I am of the view that the claim is unjustifiable under the
Contract and shall be struck out at once for the following reasons: -
1. Although there is no dispute that the disruptions were caused by the late
release of information by the Architect, most of such disruptions indeed ran
parallel with the Contractor’s own delay. The Contractor would still have
been in delay had there been no late release of information causing the
said disruptions. As such, no extension of time shall be granted.
[5 marks]
2. By the same token, the Contractor shall not be entitled to any monetary
compensation for disruptions which run concurrently with the Contractor’s
own delay.
[5 marks]
3. Although the Contractor has served an extension of time and loss &
expense claim in accordance with the Contract, the particulars submitted by
the Contractor, though appearing to be comprehensive in terms of volume,
are not satisfactory as they do not cover the FULL details of each of the
particulars of the claim.
[5 marks]
Could you please look into this and give me your advice for my further discussion
with our Finance Director?
In your reply to Mr. Chan, you should analyze the contractual position with
reference to the relevant clauses of the Contract and advise whether there are
sufficient grounds to strike out the Contractor’s claim.
[total 15 marks]
Page 57
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Question No. 2 – Disruption Claims (Cont’d)

NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Objective
The objective of this question is to test Candidates’ general knowledge of the

contract provisions relevant to disruption claims and their application in responding
to a claim submitted by the Contractor.
EOT for overlapping delays
“concurrent delay” has very special and strict meaning as decided by court cases,
but there is no need to dwell into that detail for the purpose of this Question No. 2.
“overlapping delays” is used here to avoid going into that complication.
“Employer’s delay” here means a delay entitling the Contractor to extension of

time.
“Contractor’s delay” here means a delay not entitling the Contractor to extension of
time.
Subject to the contract provisions, the general principle of law is that the Employer
is obliged to afford the agreed time to the Contractor to carry out the Works. If
during the course of the Works, the remaining time afforded for carrying out the
balance of the Works is reduced due to an Employer’s delay, the Employer shall
compensate the time so reduced by granting an extension of time of equal
magnitude. Whether the remaining time is already not achievable due to
Contractor’s delays is immaterial. The foregoing is an example of the application
of the principle that the Employer shall not prevent the Contractor from carrying
out the Works, and the Employer shall not benefit from his own prevention.
If the work affected by the late provision of information lies on the critical path to
the completion of the Works, the late provision will reduce the remaining time
afforded for carrying out the balance of the Works and should entitle the
Contractor to extension of time.
Bonus point: Recent case laws in the UK decided that if it is expressly agreed in
the Contract beyond doubt that the Contractor will not be entitled to extension of
time due to Employer’s delay overlapping Contractor’s delay, the contract
agreement will be upheld. The standard forms of contract to be used for these
Practice Problems do not contain such provisions.
Page 58
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS

NOTES TO ASSESSORS
EOT for overlapping delays (Cont’d)
For Answers based on SFBC 2005 / 2006
‐ Employer’s delay is called ‘listed event’ under this Form of Contract.
‐ Late provision of information is a listed event pursuant to clauses 25.1(3)(l)

and 25.3(1) subject to other provisions on notice requirements.
‐ There is no provision in the Conditions of Contract inconsistent with the

general principle stated above. In fact, clause 25.3(6) dealing with delays
after the extended Completion Date gives support that extension of time
should still be granted for Employer’s delay occurring during a period of
Contractor’s delay.
For Answers based on GCC 1999
‐ Similar principle applies in the case of GCC 1999 save that the relevant
provisions are Clauses 50(1)(b)(vii) and 63(a) (read together to confer valid
ground), and Clause 50(2A) (similar to clause 25.3(6) of SFBC 2005 / 2006).
[5 marks]
Monetary claims for overlapping delays
For the purpose of this Question 2, “compensable event” is used to mean a

delaying event for which the Contractor is entitled to loss and expense
compensation under the Contract.
There is a school of thought that if a compensable event occurs during the period
of Contractor’s delays, since the Contractor would have incurred the loss and
expense anyway, the compensable delay would not cause additional loss and
expense to the Contractor and the Employer would not need to compensate the
loss and expense.
The period of Contractor’s delay occurring before compensable event is not

caused by the Employer and should therefore not be the Employer’s concern.
However, when the compensable event starts to occur, there can be rooms for
counter-arguments to the above school of thought.
Page 59
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS

NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Monetary claims for overlapping delays (Cont’d)
An argument would be that if a view is taken prospectively at the time of the start
of the compensable event, extension of time would need to be granted for the
compensable event, which invariably is also an Employer’s delay. The period of
extension would cause loss and expense to the Contractor and the Contractor
should be compensated. During the period until the end of the extended period,
the Contractor is free to work at his own pace. Any slow progress during this
period should be affect the compensation.
Another argument is that after the start of the compensable event, its impact is
more dominant than that of the Contractor’s delay, e.g. lasting for a longer time.
Loss and expense should be compensated for the dominant delay.
Candidates are not expected to deliberate fully the different views and are allowed
to take one view or the other provided the rationale is reasonably put forward.
‐ “compensable event” is called “qualifying event” under this Form of Contract.
‐ Late provision of information is a qualifying event pursuant to clause

27.1(2)(g) subject to other provisions on notice requirements.
‐ It may be noted, however, that clause 27.3 requires that when a qualifying
event is partly contributed to or aggravated by the Contractor’s default, the
loss and expense should make a corresponding reduction. However, this
clause can only be read to mean that extra loss and expense caused by the
Contractor’s default over those caused by the Employer’s default should be
taken out, but it does not read to mean that the Employer is only
responsible for the extra loss and expense caused by him over those
caused by the Contractor.
‐ Similar principle applies in the case of GCC 1999 save that the relevant
provision is Clause 63.
‐ Although there is no express provision to the same effect as clause 27.3 of

SFBC 2005 / 2006, the principle should be the same.
[5 marks]
Page 60
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS

NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Sufficiency of Contractor’s particulars of claim
‐ For extension of time, clause 25.2 requires the Contractor to submit full
particulars with his second notice of an extension of time claim, and the
Architect is obliged to consider the extension of time entitlement after the
receipt of the second notice. However, there is no provision stating that the
submission of the full particulars must be a condition precedent to
considering extension of time. In fact, clauses 25.3(4), (7) and (8) permit
the Architect to take the initiative to review previous extensions of time to
the extent that he is able to do so based on the information available or so
far as fair and reasonable.
‐ For loss and expense compensation, according to clause 28.3, submission

of full particulars is a condition precedent to entitlement. However, it would
appear that if some particulars are sufficient to justify part of a claim, it
would be unreasonable not to consider that part of the claim to the extent
justifiable.
‐ For extension of time, Clause 50(3) authorizes the Architect to require the
Contractor to submit full and detailed particulars of the cause and extent of
the delay. However, if the Contractor fails to submit, the Architect shall still
consider the extension of time but only to the extent that he is able to do so
based on the information available.
‐ For loss and expense compensation, the principle is the same. Clauses
50(3) and (4) authorize the Surveyor to require the Contractor to submit
contemporary record and full and detailed particulars of the claim. However,
if the Contractor fails to submit, the Surveyor may still consider such claim
to the extent that the Surveyor is able to do so based on the information
available, subject to the proviso that the Surveyor shall not be obliged to
take account of any particulars received later than 180 days after the date
of the last certificate of completion of the Works.
[5 marks]
[total 15 marks]
Page 61
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Question No. 3 – Site Possession
A building development comprises one Foundation Contract and one

Superstructure Contract. The works of the Foundation Contract are in progress
whereas the Superstructure Contract has been awarded two weeks ago and the
possession date of the Site has been confirmed to be one month from the date of
the award of the Superstructure Contract (i.e. two weeks from now) according to
the Employer’s letter of acceptance.
In the Superstructure Contract, the Particular Specification contains the following

Clause 1.20 and Clause 1.21:
“Clause 1.20 - The possession date of the Site as stated elsewhere in the
Contract is for indication only. No monetary claim in connection
therewith will be entertained.”
“Clause 1.21 - Notwithstanding any provisions provided to the contrary, the

Architect shall have the right to issue an instruction for the addition
of foundation works to the Contract. The Contractor shall comply
with such instruction and complete the Works to the satisfaction of
the Architect. No monetary claim in connection therewith will be
entertained.”
Now two weeks later after the award of the Superstructure Contract, the Structural
Engineer just reported today that the foundation works were in serious trouble. A
number of critical footings without piles had been found to have been constructed
incorrectly and would require complete removal. It is expected that, with due
diligence, the foundation works can only be completed in 6 weeks, i.e. about 4
weeks later than the one month anticipated in the letter of acceptance. Another
big trouble is that the Foundation Contractor has already been in financial
difficulties. He may not be able to bear the costs of rectification of the footings and
may slow down or go bankrupt.
Page 62
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Question No. 3 – Site Possession (Cont’d)
You are not related to the project at all. The Employer has just called you after
hearing the report by the Structural Engineer, and requested you to act as a devil’s
advocate to critically see whether Particular Specification Clause 1.20 and Clause
1.21 are able to protect him from monetary claims that may be submitted by the
Superstructure Contractor when either of the following situations occurs:
(i) The Foundation Contractor still survives with financial support by the
Employer and the remaining foundation works can be completed in 6 weeks
from now for handover to the Superstructure Contractor.
(ii) The Foundation Contractor becomes bankrupt and the Superstructure

Contractor is then instructed to finish the remaining foundation works under
the Superstructure Contract.
Please provide your advice in a letter and explain your reasons with reference to
relevant contract provisions.
[10 marks]
Page 63
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS

NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Objective
The objective of this question is to test Candidates’ ability to appreciate the

contract provisions in relation to postponement of site possession and awareness
of the potential argument due to poorly drafted clauses and discrepancies among
documents forming part of the Contract.
(i) Effectiveness of Clause 1.20 regarding monetary waiver for

postponement of possession of Site
 Bonus point: Particular Specification Clause 1.20 is imprecise. A date “as

stated elsewhere in the Contract” can mean a date as stated elsewhere in
the Tender Documents which will become part of the Contract or a date as
to be stated elsewhere in the Contract eventually constituted.
 Normally, this kind of clause would say that the possession date of the Site
as stated elsewhere in the Tender Documents is for indication only. The
date will be subject to confirmation upon the award of the Contract or by
means of an Architect’s Instruction after the award of the Contract. No
monetary claim will be entertained if the confirmed date is not later than a
certain date. This would give a limited period for the Contractor to take the
risk of a non-definite possession date.
 The possession date of the Site has been confirmed in the Employer’s
letter of acceptance with no similar stipulation that this is still indicative.
The letter of acceptance is the concluding document confirming the offer
and acceptance process and shall take precedence over the Particular
Specification. The no claim intention should apply if the actual possession
date is within the one month as confirmed in the letter of acceptance, but
would not apply to the period beyond.
 The Employer may argue that Particular Specification Clause 1.20 is wide
enough to refer to the date as stated in the letter of acceptance as
indicative only subject to further adjustment. This argument would appear
to be weak.
Page 64
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS

NOTES TO ASSESSORS
 The Contractor may argue that the Particular Specification clause is of no

effect at all as it intends to override the Conditions of Contract which
permit loss and expense compensation for delayed possession date but
the Conditions of Contract should take precedence. The chance of
success would depend on the express terms of the Conditions of Contract
used. It is common practice to state in the Tender Documents some
modification to the standard terms of the Conditions of Contract. In the
absence of express terms in the Contract to deny the effect, the
modification stated in the Particular Specification is explicit and cannot be
totally ignored. The no claim period stated in the Particular Specification
should be valid, when being read in conjunction with the confirmed date as
stated in the letter of acceptance.
 The Contractor may also argue that there is no definite period for him to
take the risk. In the absence of a definite period, the tender validity period
may serve as a useful limit. The Contract is supposed to be awarded
within the tender validity period for immediate commencement after one or
two weeks’ notice. The no claim period can reasonably be interpreted as
no later than the end of such notice period but not beyond. It is considered
that this is the best approach to operate Particular Specification Clause
1.20.
 Bonus point: The final defense available to the Contractor would be to see
whether the Contract contains provision for him to determine his
employment or terminate the Contract if the delay to site possession is
exceeding a certain permissible maximum period.
For SFBC 2005/2006
 Clause 5.1 means that the Conditions of Contract take precedence over
the Particular Specification, but the letter of acceptance takes precedence
over the Conditions of Contract unless modified later in the Appendix upon
formal signing of the Contract.
 In this circumstance, the one month stated in the letter of acceptance is

the period of waiver of monetary claim.
 Bonus point: Clause 36.1 authorizes the Contractor to serve notice of

default leading to determination of employment if the possession date is
delayed by more than 120 days.
Page 65
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS

NOTES TO ASSESSORS
For GCC 1999
 According to the order of precedence as described in Clauses 5(1) and

5(2), unless modified by a Special Condition of Contract, the General
Conditions of Contract shall prevail over any other documents forming part
of the Contract. Below that, all other documents are to be taken as
mutually explanatory.
 The Contractor would have a good chance to argue that Particular

Specification Clause 1.20 is of no effect.
 In the case of ambiguity and discrepancy between the Employer’s letter of

acceptance and the Particular Specification, the Architect shall issue an
instruction to clarify pursuant to Clause 5(2).
 Although the letter of acceptance shall not prevail over the Conditions of
Contract, it would be difficult to argue that the one month stated in the
letter of acceptance would be of no effect. It is because such information is
not contrary to the provisions in the Conditions of Contract and can be
interpreted as a supplement to the Conditions of Contract. The letter of
acceptance is issued later than the Particular Specification and shall
prevail over the Particular Specification.
 Clause 47 stipulates that the date for commencement of the Works shall
be notified by the Architect within the period of time after the date of
acceptance of the Tender as stated in the Appendix to the Form of Tender.
Clause 48 requires that so much of the Site required to commence the
Works shall be given to the Contractor on the date for commencement.
Clause 48(2) entitles the Contractor to loss and expense compensation in
case of failure to give such possession.
 In overall term, Particular Specification Clause 1.20 gives no assistance if

the possession date is later than the one month stated in the letter of
acceptance.
 Bonus point: Clause 55 authorizes the Contractor to treat it as an

abandonment of the Contract by the Employer if the progress of the Works
is suspended on the written order of the Architect for more than 90 days
and then is not permitted to resume within a 28 days’ notice issued by the
Contractor. While it may be argued whether suspension of progress on
the written order of the Architect includes delayed site possession leading
to delayed commencement of the Works, this Clause should not be taken
lightly.
Page 66
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS

NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Effectiveness of Clause 1.21 regarding monetary waiver for addition of

remaining foundation works to Superstructure Contract
 It is unimaginable that the Contractor would really agree to carry out

additional foundation works with no monetary claim at all. The only
reasonable interpretation having business sense is that the additional work
will be measured and valued as a normal variation. Extension of time for
the additional work will be granted. Only the monetary claim over and
above the normal valuation of variation , i.e. loss and expense claims in
connection with disruptions and prolongation, are to be considered here.
 The Contractor may argue that the foundation works are of special nature
not belonging to his usual nature of work or the foundation works are
outside the scope of the Superstructure Contract, and therefore, he is not
obliged to take up the additional foundation works simply by way of an
Architect’s Instruction. However, it is normal for the Specification to
describe the scope of the Works and optional works. The additional
foundation works have been specified as possible optional works, there is
no reason to deny the validity of Particular Specification Clause 1.21 in this
manner.
 As the possession date was supposed to be available one month after the
award of the Superstructure Contract, this should serve as a good
indication to the Contractor at the time of entering into the Superstructure
Contract regarding the time required to complete the additional foundation
works if so instructed, and hence the period of prolongation in respect of
which the waiver of monetary claim should apply.
 The Contractor may argue that he had no reason to believe and

contemplate that there would not be some progress by the Foundation
Contractor after the date of the letter of acceptance. Therefore, the period
of waiver of monetary claim should be much less than one month.
 The Contractor may also argue that breaking up and removal of the
incorrect footings are entirely abnormal. The extra time to do so should
not be counted in the period of waiver.
 The conclusion of the above is that the maximum period of waiver that the
Employer can argue for is one month after the date of the letter of
acceptance and a reasonable settlement would be a shorter period to be
negotiated. The breaking up and removal of the incorrect footings should
not be included in the waiver.
Page 67
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS

NOTES TO ASSESSORS
For SFBC 2005/2006
 Clause 13.1(1)(c) authorizes the Contractor to refuse to comply with

instructions which would fundamentally change the scope or nature of the
Works. However, as explained above, the additional foundation works
should not fall into this kind of work.
For GCC 1999
 There is no clause similar to Clause 13.1(1)(c) of SFBC 2005/2006,

though Clause 60(1) does limit the authority to order variations to those
necessary for the completion of the Works or desirable for the satisfactory
completion and functioning of the Works.
Differences between the two situations (i) and (ii)
 As far as the monetary waivers are concerned, the two situations (i) and
(ii) are both subject to the same arguments mentioned above. A possible
difference would be that the bankruptcy under situation (ii) may happen
any time within or beyond the 6 weeks’ periods estimated for situation (i).
Stoppage of work due to bankruptcy will require extra time to conduct
survey, to check and record the work done, to take over the incomplete
work, to retrieve past inspection records and test certificates, and to rectify
any defects found, not to mention the possible need to put the works out
for competitive tendering.
[10 marks]
Page 68
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Question No. 4 – Nominated Sub-Contract
You are the consultant QS of a residential development project.
6 weeks after the award of the Main Contract to Smart Build Construction Co. Ltd.
(“Smart Build”), the Architect issued an instruction to Smart Build which requires
Smart Build to enter into a Nominated Sub-Contract with Bravo Engineering Co.
Ltd. (“Bravo”) for the Supply and Installation of MVAC Works.
Within 3 days from the receipt of the Architect’s instruction, Smart Build wrote to
the Architect rejecting the nomination of Bravo as the MVAC Nominated Sub-
Contractor on the following grounds: -
1. As shown in Bravo’s submitted programme, the delivery of the chiller at

Basement Level 1 is two months later than the scheduled date as per Smart
Build’s master programme which has been approved by the Architect last
week. The late delivery of the chiller will affect the completion of the ground
slab which falls on the critical path on the approved master programme.
2. Smart Build noted that the Prime Cost Sum for MVAC provided in the Bills of
Quantities is HK$50 million while Bravo’s tender sum is HK$45 million only.
Bravo’s financial capability of completing the MVAC works is therefore
questionable. Furthermore, Smart Build considers that he has suffered a loss
of profit due to the difference between the Prime Cost Sum and the awarded
Sub-Contract Sum.
3. In one piece of the tender correspondence exchanged between the Employer

and Bravo, Bravo qualified that the liquidated damages for the delayed
completion of the MVAC Nominated Sub-Contract shall be HK$50,000 per
day. However, the liquidated damages stipulated in the Main Contract for
delayed completion is HK$100,000 per day. Smart Build does not accept such
a qualification.
The Architect has just called you to request you to send him an email advising the
relevant contract provisions by noon tomorrow.
Page 69
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Question No. 4 – Nominated Sub-Contract (Cont’d)
You know that: -
1. In the Letter of Nomination issued by the Employer to Bravo, no method

statement and programme submitted during the tendering period shall
form part of the MVAC Sub-Contract.
2. As stated in the Appendix to the MVAC Nominated Sub-Contract

Conditions, the Sub-Contract Works are to be carried out at the same time
as the Main Contract Works with no separate completion date.
3. There is no qualification, other than that on liquidated damages, spotted in

Bravo’s tender.
[13 marks]
Page 70
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS

NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Objective
The objective of this question is to test Candidates’ general knowledge of the

contract provisions relevant to nomination of sub-contractors.
Contractor’s Right of Reasonable Objection
Under SFBC 2005/2006, the Contractor has the right to raise reasonable objection
to an Architect’s instruction requiring him to enter into a Nominated Sub-Contract
[clauses 29.2(1) & (3)].
Bravo has made his objection to the nomination within the time required under
clause 29.2(3). It is for the Architect to decide whether the objection is valid
[clause 29.2(5)].
If the Architect considers the objection to be valid, the Architect may withdraw the
nomination instruction per clause 29.2(5)(a). Alternatively, the Architect may
invoke clause 29.2(5)(b) and refuse to withdraw the nomination instruction despite
the valid objection with the caveat that the Contractor will have the right to
extension of time [clause 25.1(3)(n)] and loss and expense compensation [clause
27.1(2)(h)] to the extent that the delay or disruption was attributable to the grounds
for objection raised by the Contractor to the nomination.
Late Delivery of Chiller
Under SFBC 2005/2006, the relevant contract provision is Clause 29.2(1)(d).

Although the Letter of Nomination provides that no programme submitted by Bravo
during the tender period should form part of the Sub-Contract, it cannot simply be
assumed that Bravo can revise it significantly to suit the Smart Build’s master
programme. The Architect should be advised to take a review of Bravo’s
submission and convene a meeting with Smart Build and Bravo to resolve the
apparent conflict. It may be possible that the delivery date as shown on Smart
Build’s master programme was not one of the essential or critical items scrutinized
by the Architect when he approved the master programme, and that there can still
be some float time for the chiller delivery. Smart Build cannot unreasonably refuse
adjustment to suit.
If the conflict cannot be resolved, Smart Build’s objection should be considered

valid. Should the Architect insist upon the nomination notwithstanding the valid
objection, Smart Build is still obliged to enter into a sub-contract with Bravo [clause
29.2(6)]. In such circumstances, Smart Build is entitled under the Contract to
extension of time and loss and expense compensation.
Page 71
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS

NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Nominated Sub-Contract awarded at a sum lower than Prime Cost Sum
Under SFBC 2005/2006, Smart Build can raise objection if Bravo’s tender sum is
not financially viable [clause 29.2(1)(c) or if Bravo is not financially capable [clause
29.2(1)(b)].
The mere fact that Bravo’s tender sum (HK$45M) is 10% lower than the
corresponding Prime Cost Sum (HK$50M) cannot be a sufficient justification that
the tender sum is not financially viable because the difference can be caused by
many reasons, e.g. an over estimate of the Prime Cost Sum, a change in scope or
design after the inclusion of the Prime Cost Sum in the Main Contract, or a very
competitive market, etc. A 10% deviation cannot be considered as abnormal.
Even if the tender sum is low, it is not an indication that Bravo is not or will not be
financially capable to support it, nor an indication that Bravo is currently financially
incapable.
Bravo’s tender prices and Bravo’s financial standing (should) have been
scrutinized during the tendering stage to be in reasonable order. Smart Build’s
objection should therefore not be accepted as valid, unless Smart Build can
provide better evidence to prove his case. To be prudent, Smart Build’s story
should be heard to ensure that there is no insider information to be missed.
Depending on the final outcome, the nomination should either be withdrawn or

insisted upon in the same manner as mentioned above.
Reduced profit due to the difference between the awarded Sub-Contract Sum and
the Prime Cost Sum shall not be considered as a valid ground for objection to
nomination under the Contract.
If this is put forward as a claim for loss of profit, it is not admissible for various
reasons:
 There has been no guarantee that the awarded Sub-Contract Sum must be
very close to the Prime Cost Sum.
 Prime Cost Sums serve as budgetary allowances and are usually set higher.
 A 10% difference is not abnormal.
 The final Sub-Contract Sum may become higher to narrow down the difference.
 Some other Nominated Sub-Contract Sums may be higher than the Prime Cost
Sums to offset this particular difference.
Page 72
TH TH
PRACTICE PROBLEMS
NOTES TO ASSESSORS

NOTES TO ASSESSORS
Disparity between rate of liquidated damages under the Main Contract and that
qualified by NSC
It should be recalled and checked whether Bravo’s tender qualification regarding

the rate of liquidated damages has been accepted. There must have been some
good reasons to have accepted Bravo’s qualification.
Under the Standard Form of Sub-Contract, the liability for delay damages are
written in such a way that the Sub-Contractor is liable to reimburse the Contractor
any loss and/or expense incurred by the Contractor and any liquidated damages
imposed by the Employer upon the Contractor due to the failure of the Sub-
Contractor to complete on time [clauses 24.1 and 24.2 of the Standard Form of
Sub-Contract under SFBC 2005/2006].
If the rate of liquidated damages payable by Bravo is not sufficient to cover Smart
Build’s rate of delay damages caused by Bravo’s delay, Smart Build will suffer.
The terms of the Sub-Contract to be nominated must be consistent with those
made known to Smart Build during his tendering. If such disparity is not made
known to him during his tendering, Smart Build’s objection is valid. Unless the
nomination is withdrawn or Bravo agrees to withdraw the qualification now, the
disparity should be regarded as a variation [clause 29.5(2) of the Standard Form of
Sub-Contract under SFBC 2005/2006]. The Employer will have to bear the
shortfall in recovery caused by the disparity.
For Answer based on GCC1999, the same principle generally applies except that
GCC do not go into that great detail like SFBC 2005/2006 and that the Contractor
is NOT obliged to enter into a sub-contract with an NSC against whom the
Contractor may raise any objection which the Architect considers reasonable. The
relevant contract provisions under GCC1999 are Clause 66(1) for varied form of
sub-contract (or disparity between delay damages) and Clause 66(2) for
objections to nomination.
[13 marks]
Page 73

2018 - APC Part 2 Assessors Notes

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2018 - APC Part 2 Assessors Notes

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

QUANTITY SURVEYING DIVISION

ASSESSMENT OF PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE

FINAL ASSESSMENT 2018

Tuesday, 18th September, 2018

4) Format and Style of Answers

9) Notes to Candidates (as given in the Question Paper)

10) Five Common Criteria (as given in the Question Paper)

1.0 CANDIDATES’ ROLE

1.1 Candidates should approach the submissions in the role of a manager /

2.0 CANDIDATES’ EXPERIENCE

3.0 DEPTH OF ANSWERS

3.1 The question paper is quite extensive. Candidates were required to

3.2 Candidates are not expected to go into exhaustive detail, quoting

4.0 FORMAT AND STYLE OF ANSWERS

4.1 When the questions require a letter, a report, a memo or an e-mail to be

4.3 Candidates should lay out their answers systematically. Lengthy

5.0 NOTES TO ASSESSORS

5.1 The Notes to Assessors are given here to:

(a) simplify your task in assessing Candidates’ answers; and

5.3 Other valid points given by Candidates should be admitted, particularly

6.1 The Practice Problems (Part II Written Test) were undertaken in an

7.0 ACCEPTANCE STANDARD

8.0 GENERAL NOTES

8.2 The Five Common Criteria (perception, imagination, technical skills,

9.0 NOTES TO CANDIDATES

9.2 The number of main questions is as follows:

(a) First day – Questions with varying marks totalling 50 marks

Question No. 1 Cost Estimate 15 marks

Question No. 1 Valuation of Variations 12 marks

9.3 All Main Questions and Sub-Questions are compulsory.

9.0 NOTES TO CANDIDATES (Cont’d)

9.5 Refer also to INSTRUCTIONS TO CANDIDATES, which were issued to you

10.0 FIVE COMMON CRITERIA

10.1 Candidates are expected to demonstrate a reasonable level of professional

(a) Perception: A full understanding of the problem posed, evidenced

(b) Imagination: The assumption of essential supplementary

(c) Technical skills: The correct use of measurement principles, prices,

(d) Judgement: The provision of sound professional advice indicative of

(e) Communication: Free of ambiguity, with clear expression and an

The following abbreviations used in the Notes to Assessors mean:

SFBC 2005 Agreement & Schedule of Conditions of Building Contract for

SFBC 2006 Agreement & Schedule of Conditions of Building Contract for

18th SEPTEMBER 2018

Question No. 1 – Cost Estimate

Further upgrade to the building services main equipment or service mains is

Please write an email to your Project Director furnishing your advice.

Question No. 1 – Cost Estimate (Cont’d)

Attachment A - Proposed Changes (layout not changed except as indicated)

Question No. 1 – Cost Estimate (Cont’d)

The objective of this question is to test Candidates’ ability to:

 Raise queries to identify the choices between different designs of a footbridge

Candidates are expected to include in the cost estimate the following:

Item Description Order of

 Smaller pits with excavation in G/F slabs

b. Removal of all existing services and finishes no longer 0.10 ~ 0.20

Question No. 1 – Cost Estimate (Cont’d)

Item Description Order of

e. Internal partitions with door openings 0.30 ~ 0.40

f. Railings to escalator voids 0.15 ~ 0.20

g. Smoke curtains or fire shutters to escalator voids 0.25 ~ 0.40

 Gross area (8.5 + 2.5)m x 2 girth x (6 + 4.5 x 2)m

h. Finishes and sundry features to public foyers 0.70 ~ 0.90