[crs1026]

There are two flats waiting at Thunder Bay for sure. The third that I'm aware of in the rotation took something to Kingston months ago and never came back.

- Paul

 

[nfitz]

Well then, why is it before the courts? Over to you...

law

Oh for goodness sake. Steve, I give up. You seem relatively bright and sensible much of the time, even if I don't agree with you.

But your unfamiliarity and lack of knowledge in the legal area just astounds me, especially relative to your knowledge in other areas. It's like you were parachuted into a common law society from somewhere that operated in a completely different manner - and I'm not even thinking Justinian here.

I don't know how you got through various legal courses in your schooling. Or perhaps there weren't any.

 

[steveintoronto]

Oh for goodness sake. Steve, I give up. You seem relatively bright and sensible much of the time, even if I don't agree with you.

But your unfamiliarity and lack of knowledge in the legal area just astounds me, especially relative to your knowledge in other areas. It's like you were parachuted into a common law society from somewhere that operated in a completely different manner - and I'm not even thinking Justinian here.

I don't know how you got through various legal courses in your schooling. Or perhaps there weren't any.

"legal instrument": (the term you used)
Legal instrument is a legal term of art that is used for any formally executed written document that can be formally attributed to its author, records and formally expresses a legally enforceable act, process, or contractual duty, obligation, or right, and therefore evidences that act, process, or agreement.

legal
adjective according to the law, allowable, allowed, approved, authorized, authorized by law, cognizzable in courts of law, constitutional, decreed, enforceable in a court of law, established by law, good and effectual in law, governed by law, in conformity with law, lawful, legitimate, legitimus, licit, permissible, permitted by law, prescribed, prescribed by law, proper, quod ex lege, recognized by the law, required by law, rightful, secundum leges fit, statutory, sufficient in law, valid, warranted, within the law
Meantime:

By Ben SpurrTransportation Reporter
Fri., July 21, 2017
Metrolinx has decided not to appeal a judge’s ruling that blocked the agency from terminating its troubled $770-million vehicle contract with Bombardier.

The provincial transit agency filed a notice in May that reserved its right to appeal the decision, which Judge Glenn Hainey of the Superior Court of Justice delivered the month before.

Friday was the deadline to move ahead with the case, and a spokesperson for the agency confirmed that Metrolinx has decided not to proceed.

Instead, the agency is continuing to pursue a dispute resolution process with the Quebec-based rail manufacturer.

“Metrolinx is concentrating on the dispute resolution with Bombardier . . . . We have decided to not continue with the appeal process,” wrote Anne Marie Aikins.

She declined to provide an update on the dispute process, and it’s not clear when it will conclude.

In an interview, a spokesperson for Bombardier said it was a “wise decision” for Metrolinx to abandon the appeal.

“Our focus has always been to resolve the issues we may have . . . so we can come to a win-win outcome for all parties involved,” said Eric Prud-Homme.

Metrolinx signed the deal for 182 light rail vehicles (LRVs) in 2010, with the intention of running the cars on the $5.3-billion Eglinton Crosstown and other Toronto-area LRT lines.

Last October,Metrolinx attempted to terminate the contract, claiming Bombardier was in default. The first two prototype vehicles were supposed to be delivered in 2015, but Metrolinx still hasn’t received them, and the agency said Bombardier’s production woes risked delaying the opening of the Crosstown.

The legal case was sparked in February when Bombardier filed an application for an injunction against the termination. The company argued that Metrolinx couldn’t unilaterally cancel the deal, and that, whether the company was in default should be decided through the dispute-resolution process written into the contract.

The judge agreed.

Bombardier maintains that it has not defaulted on the order.

In May, the provincial transportation minister announced that Metrolinx had agreed to buy 61 LRVs from French-based company Alstom as a backup for the Bombardier order.

If the dispute-resolution process determines that Bombardier is in default, Metrolinx will deploy 44 of the Alstom vehicles on the Crosstown. The other 17 are slated for the Finch West LRT.

Both lines are scheduled for completion in 2021.

The Alstom deal cost $528 million, and was issued on a sole-source basis, which the minister said was necessary because of the tight timelines for opening the Crosstown.

Siemens, a German-based rail manufacturer, has complained that the province violated its own procurement policies by not opening up the contract to a competitive bid.

In a separate development that signals bad news for Bombardier, Metrolinx announced, on Friday, it was issuing a request for qualifications for a private entity to review the agency’s current commuter rail operations and eventually take them over. The decision comes as Metrolinx is drastically expanding its GO Transit service under its regional express rail program.

Bombardier is under contract to operate and maintain GO Transit until 2023, under a deal worth $927 million to the company.

A Metrolinx spokesperson said Bombardier would not be allowed to independently bid on the new contract because it would be a conflict to review its own work.

https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/tr...rops-appeal-of-bombardier-court-decision.html

Here's what Fitz jumped into, and has now changed the channel, or thinks he has:

dowlingm said: ↑
Contracts are not holy writ.

I replied:

They are Law. If the consequences of repeated violations of a contract aren't administered, the party responsible, in many cases, this one included, will continue to realize there are no consequences and continue doing same.

Then Fitz posts:

Contracts aren't law.

They are contracts.

Also put it in context.

It's door issues. It will get sorted out. If the issues were the wheels keep falling off, or the motors keep bursting into flame it might be different.

There's nothing unusual in this. In fact, other than the lateness - it actually seems to be going relatively smoothly to me, compared to some new rail rolling stock programs you hear about! Do you remember the Turbo introduction?

"It's door issues. It will get sorted out." And then there will be no basis for the negotiated settlement to fail, and thus no ability *under Law!* for Metrolinx to pursue a violation of contract.

Just door issues? And you expect to be taken seriously?

 

[drum118]

If its an door issue, why is BBD allowing this and not do anything about it now so the next cars don't have these issue??

It took BBD the full contract up to the last delivery of the last subway train before they started to fix the problem. 62? train with the same problem is unacceptable. Got off a 54xx train tonight and the doors open in 1 second compare to the past where it was 3-6 seconds.

You can only use the teething issue for so long before it come a joke and we are at that point with 39 cars in service. What good was it having 3 prototype cars built when they couldn't fix the problem then.

Because the province in the past has dictated where X items is to come from, it has put TTC in a hole how to deal whit these issues. With free trade here and the province has seen what this sole sourcing is doing, I expect TTC and everyone will be free to obtains bid from sources regardless where they are located so long as the items meet bid and contract spec.

 

[nfitz]

Because the province in the past has dictated where X items is to come from, it has put TTC in a hole how to deal whit these issues. With free trade here and the province has seen what this sole sourcing is doing, I expect TTC and everyone will be free to obtains bid from sources regardless where they are located so long as the items meet bid and contract spec.

Except streetcars weren't sole-sourced.

 

[steveintoronto]

Except streetcars weren't sole-sourced.

Drum's reference was general. But streetcars weren't sole sourced? Maybe the BBD's streetcars and LRVs weren't, subway cars have been, and now:

By Ben SpurrTransportation Reporter
Fri., June 30, 2017

A rail manufacturer has challenged Metrolinx’s decision to issue a $528-million sole-source contract for vehicles to run on Toronto-area rail lines, claiming the non-competitive deal violates government procurement policies as well as international trade agreements.

In a letter to Transportation Minister Steven Del Duca, the president and CEO of Siemens Canada, a Germany-based corporation, said the company was “extremely disappointed” with the provincial transit agency’s decision last month to purchase 61 light rail vehicles (LRVs) from Alstom without allowing other companies to submit bids. Alstom is a French company.

“We believe the decision violates the government’s own procurement directive,” said Robert Hardt in the letter dated May 24.

In the document, which has not been made public but was obtained by the Star, Hardt also asserted that the deal “is inconsistent with public procurement provisions” in CETA, the European-Canadian free trade agreement signed in October.

“This decision effectively eliminates Siemens from competition for future light rail car procurement in Ontario, thus causing us irreparable harm,” Hardt said. “We are, of course, exploring all options available to us to respond to this decision.”

In an email, Metrolinx spokesperson Anne Marie Aikins said the Alstom deal had to be expedited because delays to the Bombardier light-rail vehicle order were jeopardizing the opening of the Crosstown and Finch LRTs, both scheduled to enter service in 2021.
[...]

https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/tr...-contract-broke-the-rules-company-claims.html

Siemens have a bona-fide case. Once again, law comes into play with Metrolinx, Toronto, streetcars/LRVs and suppliers. And trade law...

The facts buttress Drum's case. From over two years ago:

Chris Selley: As we sit with six new streetcars instead of 50, one must wonder why Bombardier's bottom line is anything the TTC should care about

June 25, 2015
[...]
The Liberals adopted that 25 per cent rule provincially in 2008, and it is hardly unique among manufacturing jurisdictions. Quebec enforces the same threshold, and the United States a much higher one. In many cases, it needn’t be the end of the world. Assuming Toronto has forsaken the philosophy of former mayor David Miller, who considered it unthinkable not to sole-source subway train contracts to Bombardier, there should be at least a few bidders when next we get the wallet out: for more streetcars, for SmartTrack, for the Downtown Relief Line, whatever it is.

But the streetcar fiasco is a good moment to reflect. OK, we preserved jobs in Thunder Bay. But we don’t have the damn streetcars, and we’re left with far more tough talk than we have leverage.

If the bidding process for these streetcars wasn’t rigged in Bombardier’s favour, you can’t blame people for being suspicious. Skoda’s highly regarded 10T model was conveniently excluded because the TTC insisted on a 100 per cent low-floor model. (The 10T was 50 per cent low-floor; its successor is 100 per cent.) Siemens struggled with the Cancon requirement, and dropped out of the initial, aborted bidding process at the last minute. You certainly can’t say Toronto did everything possible to get the best deal — indeed, then-TTC chairman Adam Giambrone had hoped to aim for 50 per cent Cancon, and board member Glenn De Baeremaeker tried to have whole thing sole-sourced to Bombardier, all based on the premise that Thunder Bay will suffer if we don’t buy domestic, and that that’s the TTC’s business.

It is a maddeningly parochial, small-minded view masquerading as benevolence, and it’s not just confined to transit. Last year, the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives warned that CETA, the Canada-Europe free trade deal, would turn all of government procurement on its ear: It would “substantially restrict the vast majority of provincial and municipal government bodies from using public spending as a catalyst for achieving other societal goals.” [...]

http://nationalpost.com/news/toront...bout/wcm/ef0bff7c-7c23-4493-aca8-ec6568d186fc

And from Railway Age (as the world watches):

Thursday, July 06, 2017
Toronto’s transit travails take a tepid turn
Written by William C. Vantuono, Editor-in-Chief
In the wake of Bombardier Transportation’s ongoing problems with light rail vehicles it’s building for various Ontario LRT projects, the purported combination of the railway businesses of Siemens and Bombardier appears to have taken on an interesting twist. This folllows the filing of an official protest letter by Siemens Canada with Ontario’s Transportation Minister over Metrolinx’s awarding of a single-source LRV contract to Alstom.

In a May 24 letter to Ontario Transportation Minister Steven Del Duca that has not been released publicly but was obtained by the Toronto Star, Siemens Canada CEO Robert Hardt said Metrolinx’s decision to issue a C$528 million sole-source contract to Alstom for 61 low-floor Citadis Spirit LRVs violates government procurement policies as well as international trade agreements. Hardt said Siemens is “extremely disappointed” with the provincial transit agency’s decision in May to purchase the LRVs from Alstom without entertaining competitive bids. Metrolinx’s move “violates the government’s own procurement directive” and “is inconsistent with public procurement provisions” contained in CETA (Canada-European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement), signed in October 2016 by Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

“This decision effectively eliminates Siemens from competition for future [LRV] procurement in Ontario, thus causing us irreparable harm,” Hardt said. “We are, of course, exploring all options available to us to respond to this decision.” [...]

http://www.railwayage.com/index.php...ontos-transit-travails-take-a-tepid-turn.html

From the Globe:

Ontario’s light-rail deal with Alstom breaks the rules, competitors warn
Oliver Moore
The Globe and Mail (includes correction)
Published Wednesday, Jul. 05, 2017 3:56PM EDT

A sole-sourced deal for $528-billion worth of transit vehicles, pitched by the Ontario government as an elegant solution that would offer certainty two Toronto rail lines would open on time, is facing a flurry of criticism from competitors who warn it breaks the rules.

The purchase of 61 light-rail vehicles from Alstom SA was presented by Transportation Minister Steven Del Duca as a way to offer insurance in the event that Bombardier Inc. wasn’t able to follow through on its commitments to produce LRVs. He defended the decision not to put the contract out for bids, saying that this was acceptable in an emergency.

But Bombardier disputes that argument.

“There is no emergency,” Bombardier spokesman Marc-Andre Lefebvre said from Edmonton Wednesday. “When you look at the facts … we are entirely on schedule.”[...]

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/new...t-rail-deal-breaks-the-rules/article35560045/

"we are entirely on schedule". And so is Baron von Münchhausen...

 

[nfitz]

Drum's reference was general. But streetcars weren't sole sourced? Maybe the BBD's streetcars and LRVs weren't, subway cars have been, and now:

This is the TTC Flexity thread. Not one of those reference is related to this thread. Dave was referring to Flexity's earlier in the post. Let's stay on-topic.

 

[steveintoronto]

This is the TTC Flexity thread. Not one of those reference (sic) is related to this thread. Dave was referring to Flexity's (sic) earlier in the post. Let's stay on-topic.

OK, here you go...and "just doors" you say? Not quite...

Bombardier gave multiple reasons streetcars are late, TTC chair says
Manufacturer has paid city $50M in penalties
CBC News Posted: Jun 24, 2015 10:02 AM ET Last Updated: Jun 24, 2015 12:27 PM ET

Bombardier offered multiple reasons it's so far behind on delivery of new streetcars to Toronto, the chair of the Toronto Transit Commission says.

Josh Colle travelled with TTC CEO Andy Byford to the company's manufacturing plant in Thunder Bay to sit down with executives for a progress report.

Sixty of the state-of-the-art transit vehicles — which are built by the company's plant in Thunder Bay — were supposed to be rolling through Toronto by now, but only five are currently in service.

Colle said Bombardier cited everything from changes to their production line to the intricacies of the vehicle to staffing changes.

It all sounded excellent, he said. "My question was why is this only happening now?" he told host Matt Galloway on CBC Radio's Metro Morning.

'Business as usual'
Colle said he wants to receive the new vehicles at a rate of one every five days at some point this summer.

The TTC paid billions for 204 streetcars from Bombardier in 2009.

Colle said he wishes there was more leverage in the contract but notes the company has paid $50 million in penalties. They're also putting their option for a further 60 streetcars above the first 204 at risk, he said.

Bombardier declined an interview request, saying the meeting with the Toronto officials was "business as usual."

Colle said he disagrees, and that the company realizes the "reputational damage they may be doing to themselves."

He said he thinks the visit and the media attention it's received is a motivator for the company.

"The true test will be when we receive the next one," he said.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toron...-streetcars-are-late-ttc-chair-says-1.3125560

It's gone downhill since then. And as to your claim that no of the references above were about the TTC, I suggest you actually read the links. For example, from Railway Age:

[...]
Bombardier’s LRV troubles aren’t confined to Metrolinx. The Toronto Transit Commission, which ordered 204 similar Flexity Outlook LRVs from Bombardier (pictured) for its 10-line streetcar network, is also involved in legal proceedings with the carbuilder and has threatened to cancel the contract. TTC, for the better part of two years, has been dealing with delayed deliveries caused by assembly problems, such as faulty electrical connectors and Concarril (Mexico)-fabricated carbodies that did not fit properly to subframes during final assembly at Bombardier’s Thunder Bay, Ont., plant (which had earlier suffered a unionized-workers’ strike). Fewer than 50 of the 204 LRVs have entered service, and a new, purpose-built maintenance and storage facility remains largely empty. Meanwhile, the TTC’s aging fleet of 248 Canadian Light Rail Vehicles and Articulated Light Rail Vehicles are nearing the end of their useful life.

Given all these complex problems and legal wrangling, why would Siemens want to get involved in the entire mess? Observers say that Siemens [...] would gain entrée into a lucrative and growing Ontario rail transit vehicle market (Siemens has supplied LRVs to Calgary Transit and Edmonton Transit). [...]

http://www.railwayage.com/index.php...ontos-transit-travails-take-a-tepid-turn.html

Just because you don't 'like' it doesn't mean you can dismiss the situation. You can try, and pray that the Gods save BBD's sorry arse. It's far from an isolated case for them.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Just because you don't 'like' it doesn't mean you can dismiss the situation. You can try, and pray that the Gods save BBD's sorry arse. It's far from an isolated case for them.

I'm actually gaining a little respect for Metrolinx. Dropping the court fight on the order cancellation and instead ordering new cars from Alstrom and now putting the operation and maintenance of Go trains out to tender suggest that someone at Metrolinx is past the tipping point on Bombarder, and won't take their sh#t any longer.

Considering that US cities ordering streetcars and LRT are all eschewing Bombardier for Alstrom, Siemens or others, I'd say the entire Bombardier business model on using Mexican and offshore cheap combined with local final assembly in Thunder Bay to lead LRT resurgence in North America is doomed. Bombardier can still succeed in heavy passenger rail, like the Toronto Rocket subways.

 

[nfitz]

OK, here you go...and "just doors" you say? Not quite...

I have no idea what that stuff you included after this was all about - which is pretty typical when you off on what of these misinformed tangents.

a) Dave said doors
b) It wasn't a discussion about delays
c) It's about the Mean Distance Between Failures (MDBF) on the in-service cars
d) the last TTC CEO report explicity says "Of the 27 failures reported in May, 15 of them were door-related". The previous report said that "Of the 28 failures reported in April, 11 of them were door-related." The one before that said that "Of the 22 failures reported in March, 12 of them were door-related.", and before that it was "Of the eight failures reported in February, seven of them were door-related."

I'm actually gaining a little respect for Metrolinx. Dropping the court fight on the order cancellation and instead ordering new cars from Alstrom and now putting the operation and maintenance of Go trains out to tender suggest that someone at Metrolinx is past the tipping point on Bombarder, and won't take their sh#t any longer.

They tendered the operation previously, not sure why they wouldn't tender it again when it expired. I'm not convinced Bombardier is out of the running - I wondering if the press got the wrong end of the stick on that.

And if they get all the Bombardier cars, they don't need all the other cars, which are much more expensive than the Bombardier ones.

 

[Admiral Beez]

And if they get all the Bombardier cars, they don't need all the other cars, which are much more expensive than the Bombardier ones.

On time delivery of vehicles that work has a value unto itself. I support paying the market rate for quality and ontime delivery.

 

[EastYorkTTCFan]

If its an door issue, why is BBD allowing this and not do anything about it now so the next cars don't have these issue??

It took BBD the full contract up to the last delivery of the last subway train before they started to fix the problem. 62? train with the same problem is unacceptable. Got off a 54xx train tonight and the doors open in 1 second compare to the past where it was 3-6 seconds.

You can only use the teething issue for so long before it come a joke and we are at that point with 39 cars in service. What good was it having 3 prototype cars built when they couldn't fix the problem then.

Because the province in the past has dictated where X items is to come from, it has put TTC in a hole how to deal whit these issues. With free trade here and the province has seen what this sole sourcing is doing, I expect TTC and everyone will be free to obtains bid from sources regardless where they are located so long as the items meet bid and contract spec.

The issue with the Toronto Rocket doors isn't actually a door problem it has more to do with the computer system it has to register that the train is completely stopped at the station before it allows the doors to be opened by the guard/ driver (in the case of line 4).

 

[soundmuseum]

If it was in service, it was short lived as it spent all afternoon in and out of various service bay as well travel around the yard.

It is currently in Spadina Loop after coming from the EX as a dot (not in service)

Are we going to see 4441 & 442 this month with 12 days to go?? This is TTC Hillcrest, not BBD plant

4440 passed by me late Wednesday night at King and Yonge heading eastbound. The signs said "Out of Service" and there were a number of TTC staff onboard.

 

[drum118]

4440 passed by me late Wednesday night at King and Yonge heading eastbound. The signs said "Out of Service" and there were a number of TTC staff onboard.

I been told, it only did a few trippers in the AM and became a training car rest of the day.

I can see night as training, but doesn't explain why it was in and out of various service bays all afternoon that require the car to back out, other training yard operators.

 

[zmonkey]

I have no idea what that stuff you included after this was all about - which is pretty typical when you off on what of these misinformed tangents.

a) Dave said doors
b) It wasn't a discussion about delays
c) It's about the Mean Distance Between Failures (MDBF) on the in-service cars
d) the last TTC CEO report explicity says "Of the 27 failures reported in May, 15 of them were door-related". The previous report said that "Of the 28 failures reported in April, 11 of them were door-related." The one before that said that "Of the 22 failures reported in March, 12 of them were door-related.", and before that it was "Of the eight failures reported in February, seven of them were door-related."

They tendered the operation previously, not sure why they wouldn't tender it again when it expired. I'm not convinced Bombardier is out of the running - I wondering if the press got the wrong end of the stick on that.

And if they get all the Bombardier cars, they don't need all the other cars, which are much more expensive than the Bombardier ones.

Bombarider and Seimens are currently in the process to set up a joint venture to bid on all future operation tenders to compete with the Chinease. So Bombardier won't be bidding on the next Go transit operations, this new joint venture would be. Really when you only have a handful of players in the field limiting options for the government is just bad for tax payers.