Desperate Photo Enforcement Firms Sue Cities

what kind of an attorney advises someone to sue his clients... Yes, breach of contract may be an issue, but you're not going to get much in the way of follow-on business either way from that client, and may (hopefully) cause others to seriously reconsider...

This isn't really about suing client. If you look closely there is "war" on RLC companies going in some states. They are loosing sometimes big time (like in CA) and all of those RLC vendors are having financial problems, not only in US. So I guess it is meant more as deterrent to any city/state to get rid of camera contract. Something along the line: if you void/cancel contract with us we will drown you in court's costs, and even if you win it still will cost you a lot of money and you (officials) can loose next election. And we are talking about hundreds of millions dollars. Sometimes it works. Like here: http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/35/3551.asp or case from Texas, where Huston restarted RLC cameras under $16 million penalty threat (http://www.poi-factory.com/node/33699).

And on other hand: have you ever saw layer to work for free? They are paid no matter what, and I'm sure they make excellent buck on all this cases.

Makes you wonder also if the cities/states have placed a contractual obligation on the RLC companies to bring in a certain amount of revenue...

very intriguing comment.

Yet I expect the contracts are closely guarded to prevent that information from seeing the light of day.

Interesting article, thanks for the post!

Suing an entity with which you may want to have a business relationship in the future is generally inadvisable.

Its not about safety. It's revenue since the RLC companies like redflex and ATS will be out of business. Good for us, since the 30% goes to them not 100% to the local government.

I smell an increase in the ticket fee.

Lawyers NEVER lose - their client may lose in court, but the lawyer will always get paid!

Remember, this is BUSINESS - a multi-million, perhaps multi-billion, dollar industry. I am confident that the RLC companies have legally sound (ironclad) contracts. The municipalities should know what they are getting into BEFORE they sign on the dotted line. But - sadly - the temptation of enhancd revenue streams is too great for many municipalities.

Amen to that, lawyers always win in the end regardless of the outcome.

No simpathy for the RLC companies but a contract is a contract. What it will do is make new municipalities think twice about signing up in the first place and that's good news.

I hope that is true, but I fear that municipalities put money in the coffer ahead of any rational thought. They don't care about what future administrations have to deal with, they can always say, "it didn't happen on my watch"!