Quote:
Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed
Yes we do have an idea.
What owner is going to include a clause in a contract that allows a contractor to collect MORE money in the case that the contractor screws up?
No one said that Graham isn't entitled to legal recourse. They absolutely are. However, just like anywhere in real life, if you take legal recourse, you risk severing the relationship built up between the two parties.
|
Actually, they effectively are not, not if they want to continue to do business with the city. And this is real life, if these were private entities it's one thing, but when a government entity starts denying access to the legal system I have an issue with it. Heck, even between private parties clauses that are overly restrictive can be struck.
And don't tell me that you know the ins and outs of the deal if you don't. This issue wouldn't have even come up if Graham had no legitimate claim to payment.