HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 2000 0607 CC REG ITEM 11GAn
FROM:
DATE:
MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA REPORT
Honorable City Council
h #. (,
ITEM /l- (!;-
0 v Counc -nl TWeeld g
Deborah S. Traffenstedt, ATCM /City Clerk �TI>57—
May 31, 2000 (CC Meeting of 6/7/00)
SUBJECT: Consider Rejection Of Claim: TM Engineering
BACKGROUND
On May 18, 2000, the City received a Claim from TM Engineering
(TME), the title of which is shown as: Contract Specification No.
October 1998 Revised, Spring Road Bridge Replacement and Spring
Road Street Improvement Government Code Claim (see attached). The
claim was presented pursuant to Government Code Section 900 et.
seq.
DISCUSSION
The attached letter specifies the warranties that TM Engineering is
claiming were breached. The attached letter also states: "TME has
incurred substantial damages far in excess of $10,000 as a result
of the City's breaches. TME's claim does not qualify as a limited
civil case."
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Reject the claim and direct staff to send a standard rejection
letter to the claimant.
Attachment: Letter from THE dated May 17, 2000
00C4p S
kw 3
s. it
T M ENGINEERING
ENGINEERS, CONTRACTORS
LIC. #730148 A & B
RECEIVED
MAY 18 2000
C!TY C E WS OE°ART,ac +,_
^ ?.4T
Clerk, Secretary or Auditor May 17, 2000
And The Honorable Patrick Hunter, Mayor
City of Moorpark
Moorpark, California
Re` Contract Specification No. October 1998 Revised, Spring Road -
Bridge Replacement and Spring Road Street Improvement
Government Code Claim
Dear Ladies and Gentlemen,
TM Engineering (hereafter "TME ") presents this claim pursuant to
Government Code Section` 900 et. seq.
The name and post office address of the claimant are as follows: TM
Engineering, 19301 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 200, Tarzana, California
91356. Notices relating to this Government Code Claim should be sent to
Matt Moetazedi, P. E., General Partner and to Mr. Harold E. Hamersmith,
Sheppard, Mullin, Richter& Hampton, LLP 333 South Hope Street
48th Floor, Los Angeles, California 90071.
In February 1999, TME entered into a written contract with the City of
Moorpark (hereafter "City ") known as Contract Specification No.' October
1998 Revised, Spring Road Bridge Replacement and Spring Road Street
Improvements. The work called for by the contract generally consisted of
the removal and replacement of the existing Spring Road Bridge. TME'
proceeded to perform the scope of work called for under the contract,
substantially completed the Bridge on /about March 15,2000 and thereafter
achieved final completion. TME has not received its copy of notice of
completion.
TME bid upon and entered into the Contract based on the City's express
and implied warranties that (1) TME would be allowed to perform the work
utilizing means and methods customary in the industry and permitted by
the Contract; (2) it would be allowed to implement a reasonable planned
work sequence free from unreasonable interference from the City and
excessive changes ordered by the City; (3) the design was complete and
19301 VENTURA BLVD. #200 ■TARZANA, CA 91356 ■ TEL. (818) 343 - 8844 ■ FAX (818) 343 - 8865 ■ TM- ENGINEERING 0 WORLDNET . ATT . NET
adequately and accurately depicted by the Contract documents issued by
the City; (4) the City would fulfill its obligations to administer the Contract in
accordance with its terms and in a good faith, fair, and reasonable manner;
and (5) that the ultimate cost of the Contract work was reasonably
ascertainable from the Contract documents issued by the City.
The City breached these implicit and explicit warranties. TME's planned
-schedule of 'construction was repeatedly and substantially changed,
disrupted and delayed by the City, the City interfered with TME's
performance of the work. It ordered excessive and substantial changes to
the work. It caused right of way delays and issued inconsistent field
directions to THE and its subcontractors. The City failed or refused to
respond to submittals or responded to submittals, requests for information,
changes, requests for changes and extension's of time in an untimely
fashion. The Contract documents were incomplete and inadequate. The
City breached its duties of good faith and fair dealing in the administration
of the Contract by, among other things, refusing to make payments,
adjusting payments which were made, failing to make payments timely,
failing to negotiate change orders with adequate and appropriate
compensation, failing to adjust the Contract price appropriately to account
for increased and decreased quantities, and failing to abide by the
Contract's procedures for resolving disputes. There were several
employees of the City and its project management consultants and
engineers who participated in the administration of the Contract. Among
these were Messrs. Marinangeli, Gilbert, Bartholomew, Dickerson, Evans,
Phukunhaphan, Lovett, Kueny, Chaw and Abbott.
THE has incurred substantial damages i-lir in excess Of $10,000 as a result
of the City's breaches. TME's claim does not qualify as a limited civil case.
Very truly yours,
TM ENGINEERING
Matt Moetazedi, P.E.
cc: Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton
Barry M. Harman
City Council
City Manager
City Public Work Director
City Construction Manager
0 0 0 '12 ch-111 ()