The guarantor was Mr.
Wang signed the Construction Cooperation Agreement with the contractor company.
The guarantor was Mr.
Jiang Wang has a certain relationship of cooperation or economic interests.
Wang, an outsider.
Jiang and Mr.
Zheng filed a lawsuit to the court of first instance in accordance with the creditor’s rights transfer agreement, requesting the contract letting company to repay the project payment in arrears of 1407162.90 yuan and overdue interest of 246957.09 yuan.
The guarantor is Wang.
The results should be jointly sealed and confirmed by the construction unit, the construction unit and the accounting firm before it has legal effect.
If one party does not seal for approval, it should have no legal effect..
Wang and they finally performed the second agreement.
He decided to revoke the authorization of Wang, agreed that Jiang should take over the position, take over the creditor’s rights and debts generated by Wang during the operation period, and be responsible for recovering the unreasonable creditor’s rights and debts of the operation, To ensure that the housing construction funds do not affect the project construction.
Zheng confirmed that the scope of the claim was the project payment that was not paid off after the contracted company contracted to build the comprehensive building of the contracting company.
Zheng was responsible for undertaking all matters in the construction contract and paying one-time management costs.
The disputed fact between the two parties is that Heze Fuxin Certified Public Accountants Co., Ltd.
The company has never authorized Jiang to settle the project price with the contractor, It will not recognize its signature, and this form cannot be used as an effective basis for settlement of the project price; The contracting company believes that the contracting company did not entrust an accounting firm to issue the consultation form, and the company did not undertake the light steel roofing and other installation works of the complex building, and this form is not the final account report of the project completion.
The third “light steel roofing” project and the second “installation” project in the project name column were not the projects constructed by the contract company.
Zheng and Mr.
Accordingly, Jiang’s identity should be to accept the entrustment of the contract awarding company to replace Wang’s position as the manager of the project operation department, and the scope of authorization is to be responsible for the recovery and clearing of claims and debts.
The construction unit column is not stamped with the official seal of the contractor company, and the operator is signed with “Jiang Mou”, and the construction unit column is stamped with the official seal of the contractor company, There are three words “Zheng” in the operator’s office, and there is no registered cost engineer qualification signature in the intermediary department column.
Zheng signed a Construction Cooperation Agreement on November 8, 2001.
The main content is the same as above.
It can be reasonably inferred that Mr.
During the litigation of the court of first instance, on August 31, 2005, after the reconciliation between the two parties, it was recognized that the contract awarding company had paid 3900716.22 yuan for the project.
During this period, Jiang claimed to be the person of the contract awarding company, but did not see the written power of attorney issued by the contract awarding company to Jiang; The accounting firm, as a social intermediary, issues this form, which is of the nature of project cost verification and consultation.
Mr.
The consulting result is that the civil engineering value of the complex building is 4380264.5 yuan, the installation project value is 458657.61 yuan, and the light steel roof value is 365360.27 yuan, totaling 5204282.38 yuan.
Zheng, Mr.
On April 26, 2005, Mr.
It was found that the contract awarding company and the outsider Jiang signed an agreement on January 13, 2003.
Jiang and Mr.
As for the general table of consultation and verification: Zheng Mou believes that this table proves that the total cost of the complex building project of the contract awarding company is 5204282.38 yuan after three-party accounting, and the amount of the project payment to be repaid by the defendant’s contract awarding company should be calculated on the basis of this amount; The contract awarding company believes that the contract awarding company did not entrust an accounting firm to issue a consultation form, and did not affix an official seal on the form.
issued the project cost consultation and verification summary sheet on January 11, 2004.
In this regard, the contractor explained that Mr.
Jiang.
The main content of the agreement was that the contracting company was responsible for the work in the bidding of the complex building project of the contracting company and the handling of the formalities required by the construction company after winning the bid, and coordinated the work of relevant departments.
Zheng and the contractor sign the second Construction Cooperation Agreement.
In addition, it was found that the contracting company and Mr.
The main content was that Wang, the manager of the project operation department of the contract awarding company, was not able to deliver the project on time due to his poor management of the project and collected money privately.
During the second trial, Mr.
On April 26, 2005, the contracting company signed a creditor’s rights transfer agreement with Zheng, agreeing that the contracting company would transfer all its creditor’s rights to the contracting company to Zheng, The agreement shows that the amount of the transferred creditor’s rights is 1407162.90 yuan of the principal of the project funds owed by the contract letting company to the contractor company and the corresponding fruits (including interest, liquidated damages, etc.).
The contract awarding company has no right to adjust and change the project price, verify the budget and final accounts and settle the project value in the scope of authorization of Mr.
The contracting company and Wang, the representative of Jiang, also signed a Construction Cooperation Agreement in November 2001.
Later, the three of them together made Mr.
The table shows that the construction unit is the contracting company and the construction unit is the contracting company.
Wang came to Heze to invest together.
At first, Mr.
The settlement data in the form did not contain the original quantity data, and some of the accounting contents were false.
During the court hearing, both the contracting company and the contracting company confirmed that the two parties had not carried out the final settlement of the project completion.
[Brief introduction of the case] On December 14, 2001, the contracting company signed the Construction Contract for Construction Projects with the contracting company, agreeing that the contracting company would contract the comprehensive building project of the contracting company.
In order to further verify the formation process of the compilation and review of the general table of project cost consultation and verification, the court of first instance investigated the specific compilation and review personnel of the table according to law, Bai Mou, a registered cost engineer of Heze Fuxin Co., Ltd., who said that he did not see the written entrustment procedures of the contract issuing company when issuing the table, and most of the basic data on which it was based, such as construction drawings, engineering quantity certificates, etc., were provided by Zheng Mou, At present, the original archives and accounting working papers of this form have not been retained for archiving; The compilation and review process of this form is very long.
