Howdy,
On Wed, 10 Mar 2004, Mark Sirota wrote:
> > If, instead, you allow the PC to tell the protestee what
> > documentation they need, the PC has the ability to tell the protestee
> > that they need the factory spec width for the whozit#32 and the
> > protestee can (in the case of those expensive manual folks) head down to
> > the dealer and get the info from them instead of spending $2k on some
> > docs, 99.9% of which will remain unused.
>
> So is there ever a situation where the burden of proof would shift to the
> protestor? Not that there needs to be, I'm just curious.
Depends. :-)
In the case where the protest bond covers the documentation costs... I'd
say the question of who's got the "burden of proof" is moot. Either the
protestor or the protestee is gonna pay if paying is required, whoever
looses the protest.
Note the "if paying is required" part there and that specific questions
about a Porche are hopefully much cheaper to answer than the complete
manual cost... That's pretty important here! :-)
If we keep the "burden of proof" idea and don't include documentation
costs in the protest bond, the protestee would have the burden up to
what's covered in the Factory Service Info (the manual if one exists, the
dealer service procedures if one doesn't). After that (say, part numbers
are required, option package availability, etc.), the burden shifts to the
protestor just like today.
Mark
|