{"id":897912,"date":"2020-09-02T15:18:29","date_gmt":"2020-09-02T21:18:29","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/?p=897912"},"modified":"2020-09-02T15:28:26","modified_gmt":"2020-09-02T21:28:26","slug":"negligent-negotiations-right-to-recover","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/negligent-negotiations-right-to-recover\/","title":{"rendered":"The \u201cNegligent Negotiations\u201d Theory of Recovery \u2013 Is it a Go or No Go at the Boards of Contract Appeal? Part 2"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Maria L. Panichelli and Michael A. Richard | GovCon Examiner<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Attention contractors \u2013 have you heard about \u201cnegligent negotiations\u201d<\/a>?  A trio of interesting \u2013 but arguably contradictory \u2013 Board of Contract Appeals decisions addressing this theory of recovery have opened up potential new avenues of relief for contractors\u2026but left a number of unanswered questions.  In this two-part series, we are taking a look at recent case law and exploring what these cases say about a contractor\u2019s right to recover<\/a>.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

In our\u00a0last post<\/a>, we discussed the 2019-2020\u00a0Chugach<\/em>\u00a0decisions from the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (\u201cASBCA\u201d). \u00a0Today, we are tackling a recent Civilian Board of Contract Appeals (\u201cCBCA\u201d) case,\u00a0Hamstra Chico LLC.<\/em>\u00a0 If you are ready, let\u2019s jump back in.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

CBCA \u2013 HAMSTRA CHICO LLC<\/em><\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

You may remember the Chugach<\/em> decisions (found here<\/a> and here<\/a>) from our last post.  These decisions demonstrate that the ASBCA is willing to hear contractor claims premised on the arguably novel theory of \u201cnegligent negotiations.\u201d  So, what exactly is<\/em> this theory?   It allows a  contractor to recover when it can show that the Government was aware of significant weaknesses or deficiencies in the contractors\u2019 proposal, but failed to address those weaknesses or deficiencies during FAR Part 15 negotiations.  In other words, if you were to incur damages during performance of a contract as a result of a significant weakness or deficiency in your proposal, and the Government had been aware of that weakness\/deficiency but failed to address it with you during discussions, you may very well be able to recover those damages by asserting a negligent negotiations claim before ASBCA.  That is great news.  Even so, there are a number of questions left open by the Chugach<\/em> decisions, not the least of which was how other<\/em> forums -such as the Court of Federal Claims (\u201cCOFC\u201d), Federal Circuit, and Civilian Board of Contract Appeals \u2013 might view this novel theory of recovery.  Well, while we might need to wait to hear what COFC or the Federal Circuit think, a recent CBCA case, Hamstra Chico LLC<\/em>, provides some insight on that Board\u2019s opinion. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

In Hamstra<\/em>, the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (\u201cthe VA\u201d or \u201cthe Agency\u201d) issued a solicitation to obtain proposals for the construction and subsequent lease of a building for a fifteen-year term. The solicitation originally provided that \u201cthe cost of electricity, gas, and water will be paid directly by the VA\u201d but this was later revised.  Under the revised solicitation, the costs of electricity were to be borne directly by the contractor. The contractor, Hamstra Chico LLC (\u201cHC\u201d), expressly acknowledged receipt of the amendment, accepting all terms and conditions. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, it would appear that HC did not entirely understand that it should include ongoing electrical costs in its total proposed contract cost.  As the contractor later explained, its proposal was based on the understanding that the Agency would pay for the overwhelming majority of the electrical utilities associated with the building.  Though, according to HC, the Agency must<\/em> have realized HC\u2019s error when reviewing the contractor\u2019s proposal, the Agency never brought this pricing error to HC\u2019s attention, despite engaging in four rounds of discussions with HC.  During these discussions, HC asserted, the VA never \u201cbrought up its contrary understanding of the terms of the lease,\u201d which HC later argued the Agency was required to do.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

After the building was constructed, HC attempted to have the Agency take over the utility costs. \u00a0HC filed a claim, arguing that the Agency had engaged in \u201cdefective negotiations\u201d when it failed to identify the electricity costs as a deficiency or a significant weakness during the multiple rounds of negotiations with HC.\u00a0 HC argued that, in failing to inform HC of its pricing error, the Agency violated FAR 15.306(d)(1) and (3).\u00a0 In making this argument, HC relied on the\u00a0May 2019\u00a0Chugach<\/em>\u00a0decision\u00a0discussed in our\u00a0last post<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On appeal, the CBCA did not find the reasoning in Chugach<\/em> applicable to the case before it.  As a threshold matter, the CBCA noted that an ASBCA decision was not binding on CBCA.  It went on to distinguish the Chugach<\/em> case from the situation facing HC.  In Chugach<\/em>, the CBCA said, the contractor contended that it won an award with staffing levels that the Agency expressly found, internally, to be inadequate and a \u201csignificant weakness\u201d.  The Agency did not inform the contractor of this weakness during discussions.  The contractor asserted that it would have increased staffing had it been informed of the weakness.  Based on all of this, the ASBCA found it had jurisdiction to hear the claim.  Here, in contrast, the CBCA reasoned, jurisdiction was not at issue.  HC sought to reform the contract to correct a mistake it made regarding pricing.  Moreover, unlike in Chugach<\/em>, where the agency had expressly identified a weakness, but failed to convey that weakness to the contractor, here, there was no proof that the Agency had ever expressly identified \u2013 even internally \u2013 any problem with HC\u2019s proposal pricing.  The Board explained:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe contractor faults the [A]gency which, according to the contractor, \u2018never brought up its contrary understanding of the terms of the lease as it was required to do.\u2019 With this basic premise, the contractor errs. The contractor never expressed its understanding until after award. The contractor recognizes that the amendment made it clear that the agency would not directly pay for electricity. The contractor priced the contract as it deemed appropriate under the solicitation language.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

In other words, there was no evidence to show that the Agency ever knew that HC had misunderstood the pricing requirements.  The CBCA further reasoned that the parties had presumably reached agreement on a fair and reasonable price for the overall<\/em> contract, not just a single line item or subcomponent.  Accordingly, the CBCA concluded that it would \u201cnot adopt or extend the analysis in Chugach<\/em> to permit this contractor to pursue further the relief sought.\u201d   <\/p>\n\n\n\n

So, what does this mean for the applicability of Chugach<\/em>, and the \u201cnegligent negotiations\u201d doctrine at the CBCA going forward?  To be honest, it is a little unclear.  The CBCA did not reject the applicability of a \u201cnegligent negotiations\u201d theory outright \u2013 it simply found it inapplicable to HC\u2019s situation.  Certainly, the CBCA appears reluctant to allow contractors to reform contracts to correct proposal pricing mistakes if those mistakes were not expressly identified as a weaknesses or deficiencies by the Government, and where those mistakes may not have even been evident to the Agency reviewing the proposals.  But what about a situation more like Chugach<\/em>, where the Agency was not only aware of the contractor\u2019s errors, but internally noted them as \u201csignificant weaknesses\u201d or deficiencies, yet still failed to alert the contractor to the issues during negotiations?  What if the Agency was aware that something in a contractor\u2019s proposal likely<\/em> constituted a mistake, but did not specifically determine it to be \u201csignificant weaknesses or \u201cdeficiency?\u201d  The Hamstra Chico LLC<\/em> decision leaves these questions unanswered.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It will be interesting to see how the case law regarding negligent negotiation continues to develop at the Boards of Contract Appeals, and it will also be interesting to see \u2013 if and when the COFC and Federal Circuit weigh in \u2013 how the Courts address the issue.\u00a0 In the meantime, if you are pursing claims before the CBCA, it would be wise not to put too many eggs in the \u201cnegligent negotiations\u201d basket.\u00a0 It is likely best to rely on the more standard theories of recovery.\u00a0 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Maria L. Panichelli and Michael A. Richard | GovCon Examiner Attention contractors \u2013 have you heard about \u201cnegligent negotiations\u201d?  A trio of interesting \u2013 but arguably contradictory \u2013 Board of Contract Appeals decisions addressing this theory of recovery have opened up potential new avenues of relief for contractors\u2026but left a number of unanswered questions.  In… Continue reading The \u201cNegligent Negotiations\u201d Theory of Recovery \u2013 Is it a Go or No Go at the Boards of Contract Appeal? Part 2<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[9],"tags":[9895,224,11284,988],"class_list":["post-897912","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-construction-contracts","tag-advise-consult","tag-construction-contract","tag-negligent-negotiations","tag-right-to-recover","entry"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"yoast_head":"\nThe \u201cNegligent Negotiations\u201d Theory of Recovery \u2013 Is it a Go or No Go at the Boards of Contract Appeal? Part 2 - Advise & Consult, Inc.<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"\u201cnegligent negotiations\u201d theory of recovery have opened up potential new avenues of relief for contractors\u2026but left a number of unanswered questions\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/negligent-negotiations-right-to-recover\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"The \u201cNegligent Negotiations\u201d Theory of Recovery \u2013 Is it a Go or No Go at the Boards of Contract Appeal? Part 2 - Advise & Consult, Inc.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"\u201cnegligent negotiations\u201d theory of recovery have opened up potential new avenues of relief for contractors\u2026but left a number of unanswered questions\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/negligent-negotiations-right-to-recover\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Advise & Consult, Inc.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/Advise-Consult-Inc-126949043996790\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2020-09-02T21:18:29+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2020-09-02T21:28:26+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@adviseconsult\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@adviseconsult\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/negligent-negotiations-right-to-recover\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/negligent-negotiations-right-to-recover\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/0a11abe008083d5fb19c2b0feefe7bd7\"},\"headline\":\"The \u201cNegligent Negotiations\u201d Theory of Recovery \u2013 Is it a Go or No Go at the Boards of Contract Appeal? Part 2\",\"datePublished\":\"2020-09-02T21:18:29+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2020-09-02T21:28:26+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/negligent-negotiations-right-to-recover\/\"},\"wordCount\":1332,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#organization\"},\"keywords\":[\"Advise & Consult\",\"Construction Contract\",\"Negligent Negotiations\",\"Right to Recover\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Construction Contracts\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/negligent-negotiations-right-to-recover\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/negligent-negotiations-right-to-recover\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/negligent-negotiations-right-to-recover\/\",\"name\":\"The \u201cNegligent Negotiations\u201d Theory of Recovery \u2013 Is it a Go or No Go at the Boards of Contract Appeal? Part 2 - Advise & Consult, Inc.\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2020-09-02T21:18:29+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2020-09-02T21:28:26+00:00\",\"description\":\"\u201cnegligent negotiations\u201d theory of recovery have opened up potential new avenues of relief for contractors\u2026but left a number of unanswered questions\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/negligent-negotiations-right-to-recover\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"Advise & Consult, Inc.\",\"description\":\"Construction Expert Witnesses\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Advise & Consult\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/AC-Red-Logo.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/AC-Red-Logo.png\",\"width\":162,\"height\":75,\"caption\":\"Advise & Consult\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/Advise-Consult-Inc-126949043996790\/\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/adviseconsult\",\"https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/company-beta\/204526\/\",\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/user\/MrConstructionExpert\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/0a11abe008083d5fb19c2b0feefe7bd7\",\"name\":\"admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/b01e71b7acadd7657af782b7ad1a30cc?s=96&d=mm&r=pg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/b01e71b7acadd7657af782b7ad1a30cc?s=96&d=mm&r=pg\",\"caption\":\"admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"http:\/\/www.expertwitnessinconstruction.com\"]}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"The \u201cNegligent Negotiations\u201d Theory of Recovery \u2013 Is it a Go or No Go at the Boards of Contract Appeal? Part 2 - Advise & Consult, Inc.","description":"\u201cnegligent negotiations\u201d theory of recovery have opened up potential new avenues of relief for contractors\u2026but left a number of unanswered questions","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/negligent-negotiations-right-to-recover\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"The \u201cNegligent Negotiations\u201d Theory of Recovery \u2013 Is it a Go or No Go at the Boards of Contract Appeal? Part 2 - Advise & Consult, Inc.","og_description":"\u201cnegligent negotiations\u201d theory of recovery have opened up potential new avenues of relief for contractors\u2026but left a number of unanswered questions","og_url":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/negligent-negotiations-right-to-recover\/","og_site_name":"Advise & Consult, Inc.","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/Advise-Consult-Inc-126949043996790\/","article_published_time":"2020-09-02T21:18:29+00:00","article_modified_time":"2020-09-02T21:28:26+00:00","author":"admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@adviseconsult","twitter_site":"@adviseconsult","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"admin","Est. reading time":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/negligent-negotiations-right-to-recover\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/negligent-negotiations-right-to-recover\/"},"author":{"name":"admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/0a11abe008083d5fb19c2b0feefe7bd7"},"headline":"The \u201cNegligent Negotiations\u201d Theory of Recovery \u2013 Is it a Go or No Go at the Boards of Contract Appeal? Part 2","datePublished":"2020-09-02T21:18:29+00:00","dateModified":"2020-09-02T21:28:26+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/negligent-negotiations-right-to-recover\/"},"wordCount":1332,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#organization"},"keywords":["Advise & Consult","Construction Contract","Negligent Negotiations","Right to Recover"],"articleSection":["Construction Contracts"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/negligent-negotiations-right-to-recover\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/negligent-negotiations-right-to-recover\/","url":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/negligent-negotiations-right-to-recover\/","name":"The \u201cNegligent Negotiations\u201d Theory of Recovery \u2013 Is it a Go or No Go at the Boards of Contract Appeal? Part 2 - Advise & Consult, Inc.","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2020-09-02T21:18:29+00:00","dateModified":"2020-09-02T21:28:26+00:00","description":"\u201cnegligent negotiations\u201d theory of recovery have opened up potential new avenues of relief for contractors\u2026but left a number of unanswered questions","inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/negligent-negotiations-right-to-recover\/"]}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/","name":"Advise & Consult, Inc.","description":"Construction Expert Witnesses","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#organization","name":"Advise & Consult","url":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/AC-Red-Logo.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/AC-Red-Logo.png","width":162,"height":75,"caption":"Advise & Consult"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/Advise-Consult-Inc-126949043996790\/","https:\/\/x.com\/adviseconsult","https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/company-beta\/204526\/","https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/user\/MrConstructionExpert"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/0a11abe008083d5fb19c2b0feefe7bd7","name":"admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/b01e71b7acadd7657af782b7ad1a30cc?s=96&d=mm&r=pg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/b01e71b7acadd7657af782b7ad1a30cc?s=96&d=mm&r=pg","caption":"admin"},"sameAs":["http:\/\/www.expertwitnessinconstruction.com"]}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p2ztG6-3LAs","jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/897912","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=897912"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/897912\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":897917,"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/897912\/revisions\/897917"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=897912"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=897912"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=897912"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}