California Business and Professions Code Section 2314, subdivision (a) makes it illegal for a contractor to misrepresent any fact when making a bid. However, if a contractor or subcontractor is found to have misrepresented the facts in a bid, the court must award the contractor or subcontractor the difference between the bid and the amount the contractor or subcontractor would have received if they had not misrepresented the facts.
As far as I can tell, that section is the only one that actually deals with bid rigging. In reality, the only way you can get a contractor to bid less than what the contract was supposed to cost is if they know they are going to be paid less than they bid. In the old days, some contractors would bid more, knowing they were getting only half the contract.
It’s not that hard to determine what the “bid” was supposed to be. It’s just that no one really likes figuring out exactly what a bid is supposed to be. The problem is that some people (myself included) don’t even like to figure out what the bid was supposed to be.
Not only did the majority of us say we like to figure out the bid, but quite a few of us also said that we hate it when someone else figures it out for us. That is why some contractors and subcontractors are actually paid less than they bid. This happens because of several factors. The first is the fact that the contract was supposed to be an exact number, and it wasn’t.
It also happens because there is a tendency to over estimate the amount of work that must be done. It can be the case that a job will take longer than the contract specifies. It can also be the case that the over estimate isnt actually that much over the correct amount.
There are a few reasons for this that I have seen over and over again. The first is that the actual work being done isnt as expensive as the contract indicates, even if it isnt. The second is that the actual work isnt as expensive as the job would have to be if it were to be in the contract. The third is that the actual work isnt as expensive as the contract would indicate if there were more subcontractors involved.
The first two are easy to prove. If the work isnt being done as specified by the contract, you can usually say that in the contract that they are paid less than what the actual bill would warrant. While, the third is a bit more difficult due to the fact that the actual work may not be as expensive as the contract indicates.
Most disputes in the construction business are not between the owner and the sub-contractors. They are between the owner and the general contractor. This is because the general contractor is the one who is responsible for the actual construction work. He does not have to pay the sub-contractors directly. The owner can refuse to pay the sub-contractors as well, but there is no need or reason for the owner to do so.
This is a reason why the owner can refuse to pay the sub-contractors as well. The owner of a building is not in the business of building buildings. He is in the business of building buildings that are used as a construction site. If the owner doesn’t like the sub-contractors or their work, he can refuse to pay the sub-contractors.
In many states, the owner of a building is not in the business of building buildings. He is in the business of building buildings that are used as a construction site. If the owner doesnt like the sub-contractors or their work, he can refuse to pay the sub-contractors but he can also refuse to pay the owner.