Laserfiche WebLink
<br />#4. The DMG's claim for liquidated damages is groundlpcc The State added time to the <br />contract to place topsoil using hourly equipment rental tune. DMG nepmseruatives directed this <br />work ~ the cutoff they claim for liquidated damages It is unfair to charge liquidated <br />damages when you arse directing work !ry the hour. CWL asked for, but was denied; time to <br />complete the seeding and fertilization after the topsoil was placed in equipment rental time it <br />appears DMG wanted CWL to seed, then cover it with 6" of topsoil <br />Response: The original date for completion of the GEC Project as stated by the Invitation <br />and Bid, and Notice to Proceed, was to be May 23, 1994. This date was extended 28 days <br />to accommodate weather related delays and was re-set to June 20, 1994. This date was <br />further extended 15 days to accommodate machine time necessary to topsoil Chen's Hill and <br />the final date was set at July 5, 1994. The CONTRACTOR had not completed the project <br />on July 5, 1994. <br />On July 7, 1994, the OWNER had the CONTRACTOR use additional equipment rental to <br />move some topsoil to cover two small baze spots on the northeast side of Chen's Hill (7 <br />hours for TD-25, 9 hours for Scraper). One day of additional time was allowed for this <br />work. The brings the completion date to July 6, 1994. <br />Actual completion was on July 12, 1994 resulting in 6 days of liquidated damages or <br />S 1800.00. <br />The CONTRACTOR'S assertion that "it is unfair to chazge liquidated damages when you <br />aze directing work by the hour." is untrue. All equipment rental time was either included <br />in the original 90 days completion time or was included in the days added to the projecK. <br />The equipment rental specifications require the Project Manager to be on site for all <br />equipment rental hours. The liquidated damages aze chazged in order to pay to the State's <br />cost to have.the Project Manager onsite after the time the project is scheduled to be <br />complete. <br />The CONTRACTOR'S conclusion that "It appears DMG wanted CWL to seed, then cover <br />it with 6" of topsoil " is also baseless. DMG added additional hours at appropriate points <br />in the project and added the corresponding number of days to the performance time. Had <br />the contractor been on schedule in order to complete the project within the wmpletion <br />time, the additional hours would simply have been added at an earlier date. The order of <br />the work was never a question to the State. <br />m:\imp\geer~eaclm <br />24 <br />