Busjack Posted April 4, 2012 Report Share Posted April 4, 2012 Don't scare me like that lol. While we're on the topic though... Do you have any updates on the lawsuit? I was also trying to make a point. Last things on the docket are that it is set for status call on 5/24. The docket indicates all kinds of pretrial skirmishing without actually getting it to summary judgment or trial. In that there are new motions to take depositions on behalf of NABI and motions by everyone to amend pleadings, I don't think there is going to be any movement to the next stage, soon. Hence, any thought on Oct. 10 whether they were ready to move on has to be dampened. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
See Tea Eh Posted April 4, 2012 Report Share Posted April 4, 2012 The CTA NABIs will be back in revenue service on May 114, 2012. I don't have to reveal my sources. April Fools Day was only 3 days ago. I heard they will only operate on Randolph. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geneking7320 Posted April 9, 2012 Report Share Posted April 9, 2012 Has anyone produced an estimate of what it would cost to get thoses buses back in service? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busjack Posted April 9, 2012 Report Share Posted April 9, 2012 Has anyone produced an estimate of what it would cost to get thoses buses back in service? The only thing publicized was that Rodriguez said that it would cost $900,000 to strip the buses and inspect each chassis, and repairs and materials would be an extra expense. The link on the home page doesn't work, but the current link is here. Then you now would have to add the cost of three years of neglect. I'm sure, though, that the number will come up at trial--if it ever gets to trial in our lifetimes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
artthouwill Posted April 9, 2012 Report Share Posted April 9, 2012 Let's see, the buses were manufactured in 2003. With a 12-year life, the buses would've been scheduled for retirement in 2015. We are currently through 1/4 of 2012. At the rate of litigation, legal issues between the CTA and NABI won't be settled before 2013 at the absolute earliest. That considered, I look forward to CTA continuing to store those buses until 2015 and then retiring them. AT this stage, CTA won't ever put them back in service, NABI will not accept the buses back,nor will they repair them at their own expense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busjack Posted April 9, 2012 Report Share Posted April 9, 2012 Let's see, the buses were manufactured in 2003. With a 12-year life, the buses would've been scheduled for retirement in 2015. We are currently through 1/4 of 2012. At the rate of litigation, legal issues between the CTA and NABI won't be settled before 2013 at the absolute earliest. That considered, I look forward to CTA continuing to store those buses until 2015 and then retiring them. AT this stage, CTA won't ever put them back in service, NABI will not accept the buses back,nor will they repair them at their own expense. Despite whether the FTA useful life requirement on half or two thirds of the buses could be evaded by keeping them off the street for 6 of the 12 years (and actually the deliveries continued into mid 2005, so you would have to shelve at least a portion until 2017), when it gets to this stage, it is only about money, since that's the only relief the Law Division of the Circuit Court can grant.At that point, one side or the other has (de facto) bought the junk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busjack Posted May 8, 2012 Report Share Posted May 8, 2012 I see from the link on the home page, that as far as the point on which the bus enthusiasts are interested, the NABIs are going to be hauled off from where they have been parked to the scrap yard. The rest of the article has some things of interest for those who understand the legalities, and on whether CTA is going to get an enforceable judgment, but for those of you concerned that they might be fixed and go back into service, they won't. Of course, it wasn't nice that the Tribune depicted another manufacturer's bus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
artthouwill Posted May 8, 2012 Report Share Posted May 8, 2012 CTA can't play too much hardball with NABI, seeing that it still operates 45 Optimas. Optima Bus was bought outt by NABI and closed the Topeka, KS plant and moved operations to Alabama. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sw4400 Posted May 8, 2012 Report Share Posted May 8, 2012 I see from the link on the home page, that as far as the point on which the bus enthusiasts are interested, the NABIs are going to be hauled off from where they have been parked to the scrap yard. The rest of the article has some things of interest for those who understand the legalities, and on whether CTA is going to get an enforceable judgment, but for those of you concerned that they might be fixed and go back into service, they won't. Of course, it wasn't nice that the Tribune depicted another manufacturer's bus. So this should start finalizing the chapter of the NABI fiasco in the CTA's operations. Now all they need to do is go after the parent companies and try to get some or all of the $87.7 million invested into the rolling junk heaps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chitowndude84 Posted May 8, 2012 Report Share Posted May 8, 2012 Wow !!! What a WASTE of taxpayer $$$............But then again this one of the things the City of Chicago does best. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
See Tea Eh Posted May 8, 2012 Report Share Posted May 8, 2012 CTA can't play too much hardball with NABI, seeing that it still operates 45 Optimas. Optima Bus was bought outt by NABI and closed the Topeka, KS plant and moved operations to Alabama. I'm sure there's still some contractual obligation with respect to product support for the Optimas. Besides, it's not like other transit agencies can't also see what's going on. If NABI decided to retaliate against CTA on another product they have because of issues with defective parts on the first product, then, besides any new legal issues NABI would face, other agencies could very well stay away from NABI for fear that NABI isn't reliable at supporting their products Wow !!! What a WASTE of taxpayer $$$............But then again this one of the things the City of Chicago does best. If you wanted to complain about waste with the NABIs, you're about seven years too late, as that's when CTA stopped paying NABI for the buses. Now they're trying to get some money back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busjack Posted May 8, 2012 Report Share Posted May 8, 2012 I'm sure there's still some contractual obligation with respect to product support for the Optimas. Besides, it's not like other transit agencies can't also see what's going on. If NABI decided to retaliate against CTA on another product they have because of issues with defective parts on the first product, then, besides any new legal issues NABI would face, other agencies could very well stay away from NABI for fear that NABI isn't reliable at supporting their products That was basically the idea I had with regard to the report that the parent companies got dismissed from the case, and that, at least according to Sullivan, the only reason they were there were "deep pockets." I don't know what performance bonds or the like were posted to assure performance, including of the warranties, but since this was on the Standard Bus Procurement Guidelines, I assume that the same warranties were given to anyone who bought from them. Thus, if CTA got a judgment for, I estimate $50 million ($102 million - $34 million for 3-5 years use - $15 million withheld - scrap value + inspection costs) and NABI went bankrupt or somehow otherwise didn't pay, I don't think LA or NJ would take that very calmly. At the present, Cerberus can say "well we didn't know we were buying damaged goods when we bought NABI RT," but if they now didn't pay, that's equivalent to saying "we're closing the shop." Unlike their Chrysler LLC unit, the government isn't going to rescue this. Update: I inserted proper quote below: CTA can't play too much hardball with NABI, seeing that it still operates 45 Optimas. Optima Bus was bought outt by NABI and closed the Topeka, KS plant and moved operations to Alabama. See above, plus I don't think CTA would worry about the $13 million cost compared to the at least $50 million they expect back on the lawsuit, plus CTA has had enough time to see if the Chance product (built before the NABI acquisition) is going to fall apart, plus CTA isn't using them that much, anyway. In any event Traxis holds the lease on 4000-4149, so some of the money undoubtedly goes back to them. And would you refuse to bring a lemon law suit against GM for your defective Cadillac, because then they wouldn't honor their warranty on your Chevy Cobalt? This makes no sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amtrak41 Posted May 9, 2012 Report Share Posted May 9, 2012 http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-05-07/news/ct-met-cta-nabi-lawsuit-0508-20120508_1_accordion-style-buses-small-frame-cracks-north-american-bus-industries Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busjack Posted June 20, 2012 Report Share Posted June 20, 2012 The judge could grant summary judgment and that would be the end of the case in the Circuit Court. On the other hand, the judge could decide that there are disputed questions of fact, and then a trial would have to be held.... Checking the docket, summary judgment was denied on 6/15/2012. So. this sucker is heading for trial at some point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jajuan Posted June 21, 2012 Report Share Posted June 21, 2012 Wonder how that trial would play out now with CTA being cleared by the courts to sell them 10 at a time for scrap starting 6/14/2012, based on the article Amtrak41 linked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busjack Posted June 22, 2012 Report Share Posted June 22, 2012 Wonder how that trial would play out now with CTA being cleared by the courts to sell them 10 at a time for scrap starting 6/14/2012, based on the article Amtrak41 linked. Since it was "by agreement" probably won't even come up. As I mentioned before, all this confirms is that it is strictly about money, i.e. does CTA have to pay the reported $15 million retainage, or does NABI have to pay about $35 million to CTA, plus the side issue whether DD is liable to NABI. In fact I am somewhat surprised that summary judgment was denied in that I would have thought that engineers' inspection reports would have been fairly conclusive, but apparently not conclusive enough that the judge wanted to make the decision. The only thing this proves is that despite what, apparently, some contractor to a consultant said, the NABI press release that they were going to fix the buses was B.S. However, in that they were willing to mitigate their damages only by offsetting the scrap value instead of making the repairs is their problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
East New York Posted August 3, 2012 Report Share Posted August 3, 2012 Wow! I had no idea this fiasco was still going on..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MetroShadow Posted August 4, 2012 Report Share Posted August 4, 2012 Wow! I had no idea this fiasco was still going on..... First, welcome aboard to the forums. Second, welcome to the court system of C[r]ook County (heck, most systems of this county). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busjack Posted August 4, 2012 Report Share Posted August 4, 2012 First, welcome aboard to the forums. Second, welcome to the court system of C[r]ook County (heck, most systems of this county). There is a certain amount of truth to that, in that any case in the Law Division (usually personal injury in excess of $50,000) takes a long time. In this case, though, the docket, while not revealing the substance of the motions, indicates that discovery is still going on, as well as the side dispute between NABI and DD. Maybe also related to this (in that the side dispute is based on CTA's claim that the particulate filers were clogged), are stories, like this one that EGR itself doesn't meet current pollution standards, and Navistar has to use a Cummins urea treatment system (similar to what's on an MB car). Maybe that also explains why both CTA and Pace either did or intend to swap engines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busjack Posted September 19, 2012 Report Share Posted September 19, 2012 One couldn't help to notice that behind some of these pictures was a lineup of junk that apparently has not been hauled out of the 103rd Yard. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MetroShadow Posted September 19, 2012 Report Share Posted September 19, 2012 One couldn't help to notice that behind some of these pictures was a lineup of junk that apparently has not been hauled out of the 103rd Yard. Are you implying that they'll use a 7500 on the J14?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busjack Posted September 19, 2012 Report Share Posted September 19, 2012 Are you implying that they'll use a 7500 on the J14?! I'm not, but the file footage on this morning's Fox News sure did! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jajuan Posted September 19, 2012 Report Share Posted September 19, 2012 One couldn't help to notice that behind some of these pictures was a lineup of junk that apparently has not been hauled out of the 103rd Yard. I noticed the same. I thought they had been moved to South Shops lots for inevitable scrapping. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
artthouwill Posted September 19, 2012 Report Share Posted September 19, 2012 One couldn't help to notice that behind some of these pictures was a lineup of junk that apparently has not been hauled out of the 103rd Yard. Are you Jumping on CTA for not scrapping fast enough? :unsure: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busjack Posted September 19, 2012 Report Share Posted September 19, 2012 Are you Jumping on CTA for not scrapping fast enough? They should be doing the Junk Jump. Some hip hop artist could write that as background for the next promo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.