Flintco Pacific, Inc. v. TEC Management Consultants, Inc.

INTRODUCTION

Defendant and subcontractor TEC Management Consultants, Inc. (TEC), submitted a written bid to plaintiff and general contractor Flintco Pacific, Inc. (Flintco), to perform glazing work for $1,272,090 on a project to construct a new building at Diablo Valley College in Pleasant Hill, California. The bid contained terms and conditions that affected the bid price. Flintco used TEC’s bid price in compiling its own bid to the owner. Flintco was awarded the contract on the building project (the project) and sent TEC a letter of intent to enter into a subcontract and a standard form subcontract, both of which documents differed materially from TEC’s bid. TEC refused to enter into a subcontract. Flintco secured another subcontractor for that scope of work and sued TEC on a theory of promissory estoppel seeking the difference between TEC’s bid and the amount Flintco was required to pay the replacement subcontractor. After a bench trial, the court entered judgment in favor of TEC finding that Flintco did not reasonably rely on TEC’s bid price without considering the material conditions stated in TEC’s bid. The court found that thereafter, the proposed subcontract…