Despite “abhorrent” behavior by the Army Corps of Engineers, a majority of the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals held there was no breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing. Yet, the Contractor recovered almost all of its claimed damages because the Corps forced the Contractor to sign a modification under duress and ignored a significant constructive change.
In this story, two bids were submitted for maintenance dredging of the Scarborough River, Scarborough, Maine. The successful bidder was 40% lower than the Government’s initial estimate. Before contract award the Corps requested a change to the winning bidder’s plan at no additional cost to the Government and the Corps revised its Government estimate to be only 14% higher than the winning bid.
After award, the Corps unilaterally reduced the amounts it had agreed to pay for certain CLINs, which effectively cut off the contractor’s cash flow for the Project.
From these facts, a minority of the Board found the Corps breached its duty of good faith and fair dealing. However, a majority of the Board held there was no breach, despite the Corps’ “abhorrent” and unreasonable behavior. (A split of opinion on the Board is rare.)
The full opinion has more detail of how unfairly the Corps treated the Contractor.
Appeals of North American Landscaping, Construction, and Dredge, Co., Inc., Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals Nos. 60235, 60236, 60237, and 60238 (August 9, 2018).
It’s Good to Be the King
Mel Brooks in the movie History of the World: Part I (1981) said it best – “It’s good to be the King.” It’s also true when asserting claims against the State or an arm or agent of the State.
Smoke Without Fire: Damage from Concrete Dust Covered by Insurance
You’ve heard, “where there’s smoke, there’s fire.” In this instance, the smoke was concrete dust that damaged a warehouse full of aircraft […]
Changes Made After Substantial Completion Did Not Extend Overall Project Time
Contractors take heed – a time extension may be issued after substantial completion for specific work and the Government can still assess […]
One-Sided Construction Arbitration Clause Valid in Virginia
When it’s time to butt heads, know how the local turf (court) will interpret the clause.
Manage the Risk of Construction Changes
Almost any problem on a construction project can be traced to one of two things: changes or delays (even delays are really just changes). As in life, embrace and manage the change don’t run from it.
Want Your Profit? Prove a Constructive Change, Not a Suspension of Work.
What’s the Difference Between a Suspension of Work and a Constructive Change? For federal contractors, there are two main differences: . . .
No Special Defenses to Arbitration Agreements
Arbitration agreements, whether they are separate or part of a larger agreement, are contracts – an enforceable set of promises between parties. […]
How to Find (and Confirm) the Plain Meaning in a Contract
Contract formation confirms the parties understand and agree to all the essential terms. When that understanding and agreement fades, how do you […]
Navigating the Requirements for Claims against Virginia Public Entities
Contractors making claims against Virginia public entities must follow ALL applicable requirements. Such requirements may be found in several places, so check […]
