Laserfiche WebLink
-. <br />Monetary Claims <br />Item #1 Amount - $49,530.94 <br />The balance of the retainage is due the contractor after the <br />advertisement for closure and the completion of the punch list. <br />Task 4, 7, and 9 indicates that the Project Manager can direct for <br />topsoil from the East Pit at a cost to the State. It is not clear <br />as to whether this is done to satisfy the up to 6" requirement or <br />if it is for above and beyond 6". It isn't real clear if the <br />contractor had to even do 6". The contractor may have,, some <br />justification for a claim in this area. <br />OxiD <br />Item #2 Amount - $180.00 ~~'"` <br />~1 0% <br />The State will pay this. ~¢ / Qvi <br />r"'~o z <br />Item #3 Amount - $180.00 f <br />From the information that I have, I believe that the contractor may <br />have a claim. ~( _ ~ "? <br />Item #4 Amount - $315.00 ~~~ "~ °"~ ~ ~~~ <br />~9.+.~...-r <br />I believe that the State is obligated to pay for the work for <br />installing the water bars. <br />Item #5 Amount - $8,670.00 <br />The State is obligated to pay for any work completed, materials <br />purchased and/or delivered prior to the deletion of work. I have <br />no idea of what was done and what the value of that might have <br />been. <br />Item #6 Amount - $800.00 <br />The State has admitted that the drawings were vague and I believe <br />that they should that if the mistake was reasonable, then the State <br />.should pay the full amount. <br />Item #7 Amount - $1,800.00 <br />Was the work completed in accordance with the contract? The claim <br />here appears to be for 50 cubic yards of additional riprap placed <br />at the contractors discretion. It also appears that the contractor <br />is asking for $800 for the additional material plus $1000 which was <br />included in the bid. If there was a claim it should have been for <br />$800. From what information I have there is not justification for <br />