Quote:
Originally Posted by moon
I am not a lawyer but how does a legit legal claim that is awarded by a court opening them up to fraudulent contractors?
I have no issue if they want to ban any contractor that brings fraudlent claims against them or even unsuccessful claims but to ban anyone who takes them to court even if their claims were legit seems to be a way to allow the city to bully companies into ignoring legit concerns.
Perhaps you allow a private company to act like this as they are the ones that have to deal with the reprecussions but for a city to possibly ignore the best company because the city screwed up and the company wanted the money they were rightly owed seems like a horrible policy.
|
If the city cannot choose to not use a contractor that repeatedly makes claims against them, the potential exists for a contractor to take advantage of that.
Certainly the city should be allowed to consider the number of times a contractor has sued them in determining which contractor is the "best" contractor.
If the city screwed up knowingly, they would pay up. Something going to a lawsuit means that the matter of who screwed up is in dispute. It isn't worth it for anyone, including the city to go to court to fight a case they know they would lose.
In our dealings, there have been a few disputes about who is to blame, but most of them can be dealt with by offering to share the blame, and meeting in the middle. Its cheaper, easier and less risky than paying lawyers and fighting in court.