In counterclaims, MDX contended that ETC misrepresented its abilities and intentionally underbid the contract, according to a Miami TV news report. It projects that the dispute could cost MDX as much as $78 million in lost revenue and damages. 

“The subject of the litigation was a performance-based contract for the purposes of converting MDX roadways to electronic collection, or Open Road Tolling, and the vendors repeatedly failed to provide or demonstrate a contract-compliant system, which affected our customers with billing errors,” says an MDX spokeswoman by email. The “decision to terminate the contract with this vendor and procure an alternate vendor proved to be the proper decision in terms of performance and improved service and protection to our MDX customers.”

But Thomas ruled against MDX on its $19-million counterclaim, saying, “There is very little presented by the defense witnesses as to the issue of delay, hindrance or prevention of performance that this court can trust and believe.” He also was critical of the authority’s order that the system “go live” without allowing ETC to complete what was considered industry-standard testing. Thomas called MDX’s actions “dishonest, capricious or in bad faith.”

The MDX spokeswoman says the authority will appeal. “We strongly disagree with the court ruling,” she says, declining to offer further detail on its position. But an ETC attorney says, “The company spent $55 million to collect over $400 million for MDX while only being paid $5 million. This ruling corrects that injustice.”