As Joe Goldstein and I have stated, the key to winning a Florida bid protest is to point out a specific, objective flaw that occurred during the evaluation of bids or proposals. Once in a while, however, the government’s award decision is so unreasonable that courts will overturn them for “getting it wrong.” That’s basically what just happened when the Florida Division of Administrative Hearings (“DOAH”), overturned an award on in All Season Air Conditioning v. FDOT, DOAH No. 17-3184BID (Fla. Div. Admin. Hrgs. Aug. 28, 2017). Even in that case, however, DOAH made specific findings of fact that showed why a reasonable person could not agree with the government.
The scope of the invitation to bid or ITB was for all labor, materials, and incidentals necessary to provide maintenance and repair of 232 HVAC units located at 65 facilities along Florida’s Turnpike. The 65 facilities span well over a hundred miles along the Turnpike, and the contractor will have to provide bimonthly maintenance on each of the 232 HVAC units. Moreover, the contractor must be available 24 hours a day, 365 days a year to provide unscheduled, emergency repair services on all 232 HVAC units – meaning that the contractor must be able to respond to all unscheduled repair calls within three hours of receiving a call.
In order to insure that the selected contractor had the capability to perform this work, bidders were required to provide proof that they had been licensed and actively involved in this type of business for a minimum of three years. Furthermore, the references had to “specifically be related to HVAC maintenance, repair, installation, replacement services of commercial facilities similar in size, technical scope, and volume of work” as that called for in the ITB. The ITB also specifically said these references would be reviewed by FDOT in order to determine whether a bidder was capable of performing the contract.
The low bidder, Blue Ray’z Heating and Air Conditioning, Inc. (“Blue Ray’z”) submitted a bid of $128,630.00. However, Blue Ray’z references in its bid were: (1) repair 12 HVAC units per year at the same location for $5,000 a year (5% of the number of HVAC units called for in the ITB, 3% of Blue Ray’z current bid); (2) repair 8 HVAC units for an unknown price (3% of the work called for in the ITB); (3) install 3 HVAC units for $21,300 (1% of the HVAC units called for in the ITB, 16% of the Blue Ray’z current bid); and (4) installation of two HVAC units for $17,000 (.8% the number of HVAC units called for in the ITB, 13% of Blue Ray’z current bid).
As one would expect, DOAH found that FDOT had failed to review Blue Ray’z references to determine if they were “similar in size, technical scope, and volume of work”, rendering FDOT’s finding that Blue Ray’z could perform the contract arbitrary and capricious. More importantly, DOAH also essentially found that because Blue Ray’z references were all only for very small fractions of the work called for in the ITB a reasonable person could not consider them to be “similar”, therefore awarding Blue Ray’z the contract was arbitrary and capricious.
In other words, it is possible for a protester to show the government just “got it wrong.” But in order to do so a protester must have hard facts that explain why the government was wrong.
- Partner
Joseph M. Goldstein is the Managing Partner of the Fort Lauderdale office of Shutts & Bowen LLP, where he is a member of the Business Litigation Practice Group. Joseph also practices out of the Tallahassee office.
A ...
Search Blog
Follow Us
Recent Posts
- What You Need to Know About the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Build America TIFIA Loan
- Breaking News: Federal Judge Blocks Nationwide Implementation of the FTC’s New Rule Banning Noncompete Agreements
- September 4th is Almost Here: How Employers Can Prepare for the Upcoming Effective Date of the FTC’s Non-Compete Rule
- Florida’s New Statutory Home Warranty: What Home Builders Need to Know
- Orange County Proposes Temporary Suspension Ordinance on New Development Applications
- Raising the Roof: The U.S. Department of Labor Announces Rule Raising Salary Thresholds for Overtime Exemptions
- New Guidelines Anticipated Following HHS’s Health Cybersecurity Concept Paper
- SECURE 2.0 and Protecting Your Designated Beneficiaries
- Florida Appellate Court Provides Further Guidance Regarding New Summary Judgment Rule
- Pith? Perfect for Lienors, Not So Much for Landlords: Protecting Rights When Improvements Are Made to Commercial Tenancies
Popular Categories
- Employment and Labor
- Construction
- Business of Real Estate
- Litigation (Labor & Employment)
- Construction Litigation
- Competition
- Landlord-Tenant
- Real Estate Law
- Public Private Partnership
- Cybersecurity
- Intellectual Property
- Construction
- Appeals
- Public Finance
- Development/Land Use
- Litigation
- Contracts
- Data Security
- Trusts and Estates
- Business
- Supreme Court
- Privacy
- Technology
- Litigation (Appellate)
- IP Litigation
- Patents
- Business
- Regulatory Compliance
- Florida Government Contracts
- Health Care
- Foreclosures
- Trademark
- Contracting
- Financial Institutions
- Compliance
- Estate planning
- International Dispute Resolution
- Property Tax
- Conveyances
- Florida Public Contracts
- Government Contracting
- Government Contracts
- Government
- Lease
- Appellate Blog
- Patent Office
- Insurance
- Wealth planning
- Federal Government Contracting
- Cyber fraud
- Florida Bid Protests
- Public Contracts
- Infringement
- Proposal Writing
- Public Bidding
- GAO
- International Arbitration and Litigation
- Arbitration
- Bid Protest
- International
- Americans with Disabilities Act
- Restrictive Covenants
- Grant Writing
- Copyright
- Title
- Promissory Notes
- Small Business
- Florida Procurement
- Public procurement
- Consumer Privacy
- PTAB
- General Liability
- Technology
- International Arbitration
- Liens
- Liens and encumbrances
- Creditor's Rights
- Bidding
- Attorneys' Fees
- Inter Partes Review
- Power Generation
- Consumer Protection
- Regulation
- Contracting
- Government Vendor
- State Government Contracts
- Venue
- Ad Valorem Assessments
- Florida Administrative Law
- Attorneys' Fees
- Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure
- Bankruptcy
- Florida Public Procurement
- Russia-Related Arbitration
- Mortgages
- Eviction
- Record on Appeal
- FINRA
- Rehearing
- Loan guaranties
- Patents - Assignor Estoppel
- Dispute Resolution
- Statute of limitations
- Statute of repose
- Maritime
- Liens
- Damages
- Briefing
- Patents - Obviousness
- Request for Proposal
- Commercial Brokerage
- Department of Labor
- Trade Secrets
- Bid Writing
- Florida Bidding Strategies
- Renewal
- Attorneys' Fees
- Florida County Lands
- Florida Economic Incentive Packages
- Jury Instructions
- Stay
- Certiorari
- Design Professionals
- email hacking
- Forum Selection
- Offers of Judgment
- Prevailing Party
- Settlements
- Assignment of Contract
- Assignment of Proceeds
- Lis Pendens
- Banking
- Designer Liability
- Finality
- Fintech
- Appellate Jurisdiction - Deadlines
- Evidence
- Evidence
- Expert
- Expert Science
- Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure
- Federal Supply Schedule
- Florida Public Records Law
- Marketing/Advertising
- Mootness
- Preservation
- Socio-Economic Programs
- Sunshine Law
- Unlicensed Contracting
- Veteran Owned Business
- Partnerships and LLCs
- Homestead
- Standing
Editors
- Of Counsel
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Associate
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Senior Associate
- Partner
- Associate
- Partner
- Senior Associate
- Partner
- Associate
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Of Counsel
- Senior Associate
- Partner
- Associate
- Partner
- Partner
- Associate
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
Archives
- September 2024
- August 2024
- June 2024
- May 2024
- February 2024
- November 2023
- August 2023
- July 2023
- June 2023
- May 2023
- April 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- September 2022
- August 2022
- July 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- October 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016