My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Financial- Hanna, McEldowney & Associates
>
CS_Courthouse Square
>
Financial- Hanna, McEldowney & Associates
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/19/2012 2:59:23 PM
Creation date
8/29/2011 4:00:06 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Building
RecordID
10185
Title
Financial- Hanna, McEldowney & Associates
Company
Marion County
BLDG Date
1/1/1999
Building
Courthouse Square
BLDG Document Type
Finance
Project ID
CS9801 Courthouse Square Construction
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
54
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
~ ~ <br />From: MICHAEL HANSEN <br />To: GWM2. M-EDISON(ELYON) <br />Date: 10/7/97 9:20am <br />Subject: Unpaid bills -Reply <br />Elyn, <br />I have looked at two agreements. The first is a"Buyer's Broker Employment AgreemenY' signed by Dan Berrey <br />on September 1, 1996. I don't know if Randy ever executed this agreement. I assume so. The agreement <br />provides that Dan was our agent for the purpose of acquiring the three properties, including doing the relocation <br />assistance. We promised a fee of $23,000. The agreement does not expressly provide for any fees, except that <br />upon termination, Marion County would pay an "authorized out-of-pocket expenses". <br />The second agreement is the mutual release. It says that Marion County and Transit will pay Dan's outstanding <br />bills from the architect and the general contractor. It makes no provision for other unpaid expenses. <br />I conclude that we did not deal with issues such as the one you presented. It is a fair inference from the first <br />agreement that Dan, as our agent, would negotiate the deal, and the county would pay the acquision and the <br />relocation assistance benefits. The question is whether we authorized any out-of-pocket expenses--such as hiring <br />a relocation consultant, or whether Dan hired the consuftant for his own purposes and agreed to pay him. The <br />release does not address this issue. <br />There are two sources of information. One: Randy. Did he authorize hiring a consultant and agree to pay the <br />cost? Two: The consultant should have an agreement with Dan. What does the agreement say? (If it provides <br />that Dan, as agent for Marion County, hires the consultant and promises that Marion County will pay, maybe we are <br />stuck. ~t becomes an issue of the extent of his agency. I think he could negotiate sales and relocation benefits. f <br />don't think he could hire people and expect us to pay unless we authorized it expressly. So, we are back to <br />question one.) <br />Given the dollar amount, you will also need to do a practicality check. Is it better to pay the $200 and keep the <br />consultant happy, or send him back to Dan to pay up on his debts. If you decide to pay, why not ask the <br />consultant to just invoice Marion County directly. We can take a position that we have an agreement, through our <br />former agent. Just be sure the payment is in full for everything the consultant may be owed. We don't want to wind <br />up paying other bills. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.