Close

Not a member yet? Register now and get started.

lock and key

Sign in to your account.

Account Login

Forgot your password?

BATTLE OVER TRAFFIC CAMERAS FOR CITY ROADS ENDS IN COURT

23 Feb Technology

The battle between two service providers of traffic cameras for the City of Cape Town has ended, with Syntell ordered to relocate its analogue cameras so that Total Traffic Solutions can install its digital cameras as requested by the city.

But now Total Client Services (TCS), formerly known as Labat, has been told by the city that its contract to provide traffic camera systems to the city will not be continued.

TCS chief executive Shaheed Moharned said the city’s bid adjudication committee did not give reasons. He said TCS has been the city’s supplier of traffic contravention systems for the past five years.

The contract has reportedly been awarded to Syntell.

Mohamed said TCS would take “whatever steps necessary” to protect te contract.

Mohamed said the dispute arose last year when the city ordered Syiitell to relocate their analogue cameras. Syntell refused.

The city then complained that TCS, which had service agreements with Syntell to provide cameras, was not performing.

TCS then applied for court relief against Syntell. Syntell responded with a counter-application for payment of R1 .9 million. But the Cape High Court has now ruled in favour of TCS.

According to court papers, TCS was awarded the contract to provide traffic violation equipment in 2004. Syitell was one of the unsuccessful bidders. When Syntell threatened to appeal the contract, the city urged the two service providers to reach an agreement.

Two written agreements were signed by both companies in May 2004, one between TCS (then Labat) and Syntell and one between Labat and the city. The latter contract was for 60 months, ending in May 2009. Mohamed said this contract would be extended until December 2010 so that offences logged up to June this year could be finalised.

The city’s previous contracts with Syntell expired a year later in August 2005.

In December 2007, the city asked TCS to supply seven outstanding cameras still owed to the city TCS said it would place the cameras at prime spots. But as Syntell’s cameras were in place there, the city was asked to confirm the positioning of the TCS cameras. When the city said in January 2008 that TCS could deploy its cameras at these sites, Syntell said its cameras would stay In the TCS court application, the judge ruled that Syntell has to relocate its cameras.

Syntell is not entitled to relief of R1.9m and was ordered to pay costs.

Source: Cape Times – Anel Powell