The specs on the print contradicted themselves. That would and should be brought out in a drawing review. It was that point I thought we had pretty much agreed. Perhaps not, but the next quote seems to suggest you agreed that contract review should resolve such differences.
If I understood the description of the specifications, and the OP can verify, the specifications as listed were clear cut. The dimension was .460 min. Since a minimum tolerance was applied to the specification, the title block tolerance (±.010) would not apply. QMMike, is it correct to state that there is no other tolerance applied to the individual dimension aside from "min"? It would be helpful if you can show us the area of the drawing.
In the case of wall thickness that was brought up listed as a spec of .060, since no tolerance was applied to the individual spec, the tolerance block should apply, overridden only by specific wall thickness notations, or by design requirements of specified features of the part that would change from the nominal wall thickness.
In both cases, at least to my understanding, the specifications are clear and if there is a design issue resulting from the customer not expressing what they really need, then they need to correct the issue. As a good supplier, it would be to our advantage to assist in helping them express what they need.