If the reason for the rejection is based on a real scientific basis .and the error was simple and can be treated and did not affect the performance of structure in any way my opinion is that the contractor pay all costs for the difference and if the error is essential and can be repaired, I do the same procedure ... If it can not be repaired, the contractor should remove construction with paying all the costs and even those resulting from the delay of work.

If the reason for the rejection is based on a real scientific basis .and the error was simple and can be treated and did not affect the performance of structure in any way my opinion is that the contractor pay all costs for the difference and if the error is essential and can be repaired, I do the same procedure ... If it can not be repaired, the contractor should remove construction with paying all the costs and even those resulting from the delay of work.

Reason for rejection if it is due to the violation of the contract between client and the contractor,then the contractor should redo the work as per the contract specifications.Consultant is the final authority who acts on behalf of the client.

Kindly provide more information about the rejected part.

he recommendation o Shakir M Quasim is good enough and upheld

Simple, by redraw an active alternative procedure to conduct this part under consideration, may be!

Regards,

Emad

Maybe one can say who does give the final word about the work done and what is the rejection involved. Sometimes, when this happens by an error and it can be repaired, the contractor must obey and do it. If the level of rejection is catastrophic, as the case of the work is entirely lost, the question arises about: 1- how could the work go too further and nobody saw nothing wrong before? 2- Up to what level, is the other parts also involved and responsable for the SAME ERROR?

Let me tell you a little story. I did a project of an expansion of an existing steel structure of one shed. I did all the specification for construction, fabrication, painting, shipping and assembly. When doing the text, the light goes off due to rain, and I lose part of my work. Afterwards, I redid everything, this includes the need to change my standard, where the color was "blue", to the one at the site "beige".

But I didn't realize till that time, that this correction was lost too. Because of this rain, the new structure was painted in "blue". Appearently, it was only my fault alone!

But, I said to the owner, that there was 3 persons who did the errors:

1- me, because I didn't saw that this part of text was not corrected again (became lost), after checking everything, when the light came up again;

2- your buyer, because he didn't write what is the color to be used, in the contract, nor even checked if the kind and color of the ink-which would be used-was the one existing in the site (which would evidence the wrong color);

3-the selected fabricator which had being there, saw all the exsiting structure, and did never make any question about the difference between the existing color and the other on the specification.

He agreed with me. I said to him discount 1/3 of the repainting value on my services prices. After all that happens, I was authorized by him to do the remaining part of others sheds.

Nevertheless, I removed from the MODEL which I used to generate the specification several times, the COLOR of anything, and included the phase: "the color must follow the one defined by the client/owner"... It was a sad way of avoid the damage caused by the light which went off. Maybe the light supplier must be blamed too (lgs).

Therefore, there are cases and case... including, some cases where the consultant is paid by other supplier, to create some kind of rejection in way to harm the present contractor, because the first did lose this work. It is a very bad procedure, which economic pressure can lead to happen. For this reason, before go to justice (it can be required), the parts involved must analyse what is the participation of anyone in the event and how to fix the things. That is only my oppinion. Hope that youhave not to pay all the ink... (lgs).

Agreed with

@ Emad Kamil Hussein