The consortium building the much-delayed Eglinton Crosstown LRT claims its attempts to finish the project have been “hamstrung” by never-ending demands from Toronto’s transit agency, as the group attempts to shift blame in a newly filed lawsuit against provincial transit agency Metrolinx.
A notice of application filed by Crosslinx Transit Solutions (CTS), and seen by Global News, characterizes the Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) as out of control and making a series of demands that are not in line with the project’s blueprint.
The lawsuit blames the Ford government and Metrolinx for failing to tie the TTC to a contract that would formally lay out the terms for it to operate the Eglinton Crosstown LRT in future years.
“Without a contract … the TTC is left without any clear contractual direction, boundaries or responsibilities,” the lawsuit claims. “Crosslinx is left in an impossible situation where it must meet obligations that depend on the actions of another party who has no reciprocal contractual obligations.”
The lawsuit is the latest salvo in an escalating blame game, which comes after years of delays and mounting frustration among taxpayers, transit riders and business owners.
While neither Infrastructure Ontario nor Metrolinx have filed a legal response, they claim the lawsuit was designed to distract from the main point: that CTS has yet to provide Metrolinx with a realistic timeline for the project’s completion.
“This is a distraction and a delay tactic by CTS,” a Metrolinx spokesperson said in a statement. “It is time for CTS to focus on getting this project complete and deliver a safe, high quality, and reliable system.”
Metrolinx said there was no obligation under the Project Agreement for Metrolinx to enter into an operator agreement, as the CTS lawsuit demands.
One official with direct knowledge of Metrolinx’s operations pointed out that the initial project agreement — the master plan for the Eglinton Crosstown — was written in 2012 and included Toronto, the TTC, the province and Metrolinx.
The CTS lawsuit includes a list of what the consortium believes are unreasonable demands made by Toronto’s transit system.
Essentially, unless the transit agency signs an operating agreement, CTS argues it “has no mechanism to control or restrain the conduct of the TTC.”
A spokesperson for the TTC told Global News the agency does not comment on “matters before the courts.”
The issues, the person with knowledge of Metrolinx operations said, run deep.
The official said that Metrolinx was currently not able to run a train the length of the Eglinton Crosstown route at normal speed due to technical issues with the track.
“The Project is at an advanced stage,” the CTS notice of application reads. “Almost all construction is complete, and the testing and commissioning phase of the Project is well advanced.”
The lawsuit comes as CTS and the province seem stuck in a stalemate.
Metrolinx CEO Phil Verster told Global News that his organization was withholding “substantial” sums of money from the builders until the project is largely completed. CTS for its part appears not to have provided an acceptable completion date for the province to announce, leaving the government to defend an ever more delayed project.
Verster said CTS had committed to deliver a “credible schedule” for project completion by Thursday, and informed Metrolinx of the lawsuit on Monday night. “It’s my sincere hope that they’re still going to deliver (the schedule),” he said.
In its lawsuit, however, CTS contends that the TTC’s vision for how the project should move forward is “significantly out of step” with what the builders believe they signed up for.
“Crosslinx is now being asked to change its plans, designs or sequence of activities to accommodate the wishes of a third party who has no contract to guide them,” the lawsuit said, outlining its demand a formal operating agreement is agreed with Metrolinx.
The lawsuit specifically blamed the government, which it says has taken “an irresponsibly hands-off approach, leaving its two contractors to try to sort it out themselves.”
Comments