Articles Tagged with Procurement Fraud

Published on:

Second Circuit rules that relevant government “payment decision” under Escobar included Veterans Administration’s initial decision to award contracts based on claim that contractor qualified as aservice-disabled, veteran-owned small business”—not just the VA’s subsequent decisions to make payments under those contracts.

In a key victory for the federal government and qui tam whistleblowers, the Second Circwhistlebloweruit Court of Appeals has affirmed that false statements regarding eligibility to take part in government programs—and not just subsequent false claims for payment after being allowed to participate—are actionable under the False Claims Act notwithstanding the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2016 landmark decision in Universal Health Services v. Escobar. The court in United States v. Strock rejected the idea that the only relevant “payment decision” under Escobar was the decision to pay a contractors’ invoices without regard to the initial decision to award the contract.

Impact on False Claims Act cases involving eligibility

Published on:

Firm allegedly provided government with inaccurate cost data during contract negotiations, failed to disclose that estimates had been reduced by automation of manual tasks.

Federal prosecutors have announced that CDM Smith, an environmental engineering and construction firm located in Fairfax, Virginia, has agreshutterstock_752242222-300x200ed to pay $5.6 million to resolve claims that it violated the False Claims Act by overcharging the U.S. Navy in connection with two waste water system contracts.  The company employee who blew the whistle on the misconduct by filing a qui tam lawsuit under the False Claims Act stands to receive a significant whistleblower reward.

Inaccurate cost and labor figures used