The maintenance contract required Admiral to have a specified minimum number of maintenance mechanics on duty at each location during specified hours and the amount Admiral would be paid depended on the number of elevators and escalators in operation. The government instructed Admiral to construct its pricing based on the agency’s estimates for how long and how many escalators and elevators would be out of service during renovation. This Admiral did but they remained out of service longer than projected and the Appeals Board decided that Admiral suffered damages due to the agency’s erroneous estimates and concluded Admiral should be in just as good a position as the one in which it would have been had the estimate been correct – no better or worse. The parties agreed the difference between what was actually paid Admiral and what would have been paid had the estimates been correct was $259,000. However, the Board reduced the amount for two reasons: (1) using an industry standard, it reduced the amount by $26,000 or 10% of the price that constituted costs of material and parts Admiral would have incurred and (2) $31,000 because for a six month period the elevators were out of service because Admiral was repairing them which was a different reason than stated in the contract for renovations or modernizations being conducted by another contractor (Admiral Elevator v. Social Security Adm., CBCA, No. 470).

{TAG_FORM_TITLE}