False Claims | The Contracting Education Academy

September 17, 2018 By cs

Men indicted for providing falsely-labeled body armor

Two Florida executives made their initial appearance in federal court on Sept. 7, 2018 on charges related to falsely-labeled hard body armor plates they provided to the United States government.

According to allegations in the indictment, Dan Thomas Lounsbury, Jr., of South Palm Beach, is the founder, sole owner, and CEO of Tactical Products Group, LLC (TPG), a Florida-based manufacturer and re-seller of various products to military, law enforcement, and private security clients. Andres Lopez-Munoz, 34, of Boynton Beach, is TPG’s Vice President for Sales and Federal Contracting.

In 2012, TPG was selected as a sub-contractor on a contract to provide certain goods, including ten sets of hard body armor plates, to the United States government.

The government had requested a specific type of plate, and Lounsbury and Lopez-Munoz both knew that no substitutions were allowed.
Furthermore, Lounsbury and Lopez-Munoz both knew that these plates would be used to protect government personnel. The consequence of a failure of body armor is death or serious bodily injury.
Nevertheless, Lounsbury and Lopez-Munoz worked together to procure cheaper substitute plates, and then to put fraudulent labels on these substitute plates falsely stating that they were the type of plates that the government had required.
Some of these cheaper substitute plates were far outside their warranty period, were not as protective as the false labels claimed, and had the potential to “delaminate,” meaning that the adhesive binding the layers of the body armor plate could fail, under certain conditions.

Lounsbury and Lopez-Munoz are both charged with conspiracy to defraud the government with respect to claims and wire fraud. Lounsbury is additionally charged with false, fictitious, or fraudulent claims. If convicted, they face a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison. Actual sentences for federal crimes are typically less than the maximum penalties. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after taking into account the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.

Readers are reminded that an indictment contains allegations that a defendant has committed a crime. Every defendant is presumed to be innocent until and unless proven guilty in court.

Source: https://www.justice.gov/usao-edva/pr/men-indicted-providing-falsely-labeled-body-armor

August 9, 2018 By cs

How to spot 4 common types of public sector procurement fraud

Both public sector procurement and private sector procurement are excellent fields full of incredibly talented people, but every so often problems still come up.

Fraud isn’t something you want to experience in any field, and procurement is no different.

This is the first article in a series that will examine the most common types of public sector procurement fraud to help you keep up-to-date on red flags you should look out for.

In this article, we’ll cover all of the key points about 4 common types of public sector procurement fraud:

Eliminating or reducing competition
Biased supplier selection
“Corrupt” contract negotiation or management
Over- or false payment

Keep reading this article at: https://www.publicspendforum.net/blogs/peter-smith/2017/02/26/public-sector-procurement-fraud-the-four-common-types

August 3, 2018 By cs

3M to pay $9.1 million, resolving allegations it sold DLA defective hearing protection devices

The Department of Justice has announced that the 3M Company (3M), headquartered in St. Paul, Minnesota, has agreed to pay $9.1 million to resolve allegations that it knowingly sold the dual-ended Combat Arms Earplugs, Version 2 (CAEv2) to the United States military without disclosing defects that hampered the effectiveness of the hearing protection device.

“The Department of Justice is committed to protecting the men and women serving in the United States military from defective products and fraudulent conduct,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Chad A. Readler of the Department’s Civil Division. “Government contractors who seek to profit at the expense of our military will face appropriate consequences.”

“Through rigorous enforcement of the False Claims Act, we protect taxpayer dollars from waste, fraud, and abuse,” said U. S. Attorney Sherri Lydon for the District of South Carolina. “And in this case in particular, we are proud to defend the integrity of our military programs and ensure that our men and women in uniform are adequately protected as they serve our country.”

“Today’s settlement will ensure that those who do business with the government know that their actions will not go unnoticed,” said Frank Robey, director of the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command’s Major Procurement Fraud Unit. “Properly made safety equipment, for use by our Soldiers, is vital to our military’s readiness. Our agents will respond robustly to protect the safety of our military.”

“This settlement demonstrates the commitment of the Defense Criminal Investigative Service and our law enforcement partners to hold companies accountable for supplying substandard products, in particular products that could directly impact our service members’ health and welfare. DCIS protects the integrity of Defense Department programs by rooting out fraud, waste, and abuse that negatively affect the wellbeing of our troops,” said Special Agent in Charge Robert E. Craig, Jr., DCIS Mid-Atlantic Field Office.

The settlement announced today resolves allegations that 3M violated the False Claims Act by selling or causing to be sold defective earplugs to the Defense Logistics Agency. Specifically, the United States alleged that 3M, and its predecessor, Aearo Technologies, Inc., knew the CAEv2 was too short for proper insertion into users’ ears and that the earplugs could loosen imperceptibly and therefore did not perform well for certain individuals. The United States further alleged that 3M did not disclose this design defect to the military.

The allegations resolved by the settlement were brought in a lawsuit filed under the qui tam, or whistleblower, provisions of the False Claims Act. The act permits private parties to sue on behalf of the government when they believe that defendants submitted false claims for government funds and to share in any recovery. As part of today’s resolution, the whistleblower will receive $1,911,000.

The settlement was the result of a coordinated effort by the Civil Division of the Department of Justice, the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of South Carolina, the Army Criminal Investigation Command, and the Defense Criminal Investigative Service.

The case is captioned United States ex rel. Moldex-Metric v. 3M Company, Case No. 3:16-cv-1533-MBS (D.S.C.). The claims resolved by the settlement are allegations only, and there has been no determination of liability.

Source: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/3m-company-agrees-pay-91-million-resolve-allegations-it-supplied-united-states-defective-dual

June 15, 2018 By cs

$20 million lawsuit settled alleging contractor falsely overcharged Navy for ship husbanding services

Inchcape Shipping Services Holdings Limited and certain of its subsidiaries (collectively, Inchcape) have agreed to pay $20,000,000 to resolve allegations that they violated the False Claims Act by knowingly overbilling the U.S. Navy under contracts for ship husbanding services, the Department of Justice has announced.

Inchcape is a marine services contractor headquartered in the United Kingdom.

Inchcape provided goods and services to Navy ships at ports in several regions throughout the world, including southwest Asia, Africa, Panama, North America, South America and Mexico. Inchcape provided ships with food and other subsistence items, waste removal, telephone services, ship-to-shore transportation, force protection services and local transportation. The lawsuit alleged that from 2005 to 2014, Inchcape knowingly overbilled the Navy for these services by submitting invoices that overstated the quantity of goods and services provided, billing at rates in excess of applicable contract rates, and double-billing for some goods and services.

“Federal contractors may only charge the government for costs allowed by their federal contracts,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Chad A. Readler, head of the Justice Department’s Civil Division. “The Department of Justice will take action against contractors that knowingly submit inflated claims to the armed forces—or any other agency of the United States—as those inflated claims wrongfully divert taxpayer dollars.”

“We trust contractors supporting our warfighters to act with the utmost integrity and expect them to comply with their obligations to bill the government as called for by their contracts,” said U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jessie K. Liu. “This settlement reflects our Office’s strong commitment to holding accountable those who violate these fundamental principles, no matter where they may be located.”

“This settlement demonstrates that the Department of the Navy will continue to hold contractors accountable for the agreements they make to supply our fleet,” said Secretary of the Navy Richard V. Spencer. “The Department expects strict adherence to higher standards within the Department and expects the same from its contractors.”

“Fraud is an abuse of the system that siphons resources away from the American warfighter,” said Jeremy Gauthier, Special Agent in Charge of the Naval Criminal Investigative Service’s Washington D.C. field office. “NCIS will continue to work with our law enforcement partners to hold responsible those who would put personal gain above corporate integrity.”

The lawsuit was brought under the qui tam, or whistleblower, provisions of the False Claims Act by three former employees of Inchcape, Noah Rudolph, Andrea Ford and Lawrence Cosgriff. Under the act, a private citizen may bring suit on behalf of the United States for false claims and share in any recovery. The government may intervene in the case, as it did here. The False Claims Act allows the government to recover treble damages and penalties from those who violate it. As part of today’s resolution, the whistleblowers will receive approximately $4.4 million.

The case was handled jointly by the Civil Division’s Commercial Litigation Branch and the U.S. Attorney’s Office of the District of Columbia, with assistance from the Department of the Navy and the Naval Criminal Investigative Service.

The case is captioned United States ex rel. Rudolph v. Inchcape Shipping Services Holdings Limited, et al., No. 1:10-cv-01109 (D.D.C). The claims alleged in the case are allegations only, and there has been no determination of liability.

Source: https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/pr/united-states-settles-lawsuit-alleging-contractor-falsely-overcharged-united-states-navy

June 14, 2018 By cs

Court enters judgment against couple for overcharging DLA for spare vehicle parts

A New Jersey couple has been ordered to pay $232,891.37 to the United States for overcharging the military for light assemblies for munitions vehicles for the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA).

The defendants, New Jersey residents Babu Metgud and Shubhada Kalyani, operated Shubhada Industries, a defense contractor. The United States, as the plaintiff, moved for summary judgment against Metgud and Kalyani. In granting the United States’ motion, the district court entered judgment against the individual defendants, awarding damages and imposing the maximum penalty allowable under the False Claims Act.

The case arose from a contract in which Shubhada Industries agreed to manufacture light assemblies for DLA. Instead of actually manufacturing those parts, Shubhada purchased them from a third party and charged the government a total purchase price of $73,842 — which amounted to a 5,400 percent mark-up of the cost price, according to the court’s opinion. When the government questioned the cost, Metgud justified it by explaining that costs sometimes seem very high “to untrained eyes.”

Under the False Claims Act, a person who causes false or fraudulent claims to be submitted to the government for payment is liable for three times the government’s damages, plus civil penalties for each false claim. The court’s judgment consists of three times the amount the DLA paid, plus a civil penalty of $11,000, which the court noted was “at the top of the statutory range.”

In imposing this maximum penalty, the court explained that Metgud and Kalyani did not disclose to the agency their purchase of the light assemblies from someone else. In addition, the court opined the individuals “have not been forthright or cooperative in the Government’s investigation of the claims alleged in the amended complaint,” and seemed to “shrug off” the investigation and the court proceeding.

“Those who do business with the government must treat taxpayers fairly,” said U.S. Attorney McSwain. “This case demonstrates my Office’s commitment to holding accountable defense contractors and others who try to game the system for personal profit at the military’s expense.”

The case is significant because the government, as the plaintiff and moving party at summary judgment, obtained a judgment on the merits and without a trial. It is also significant because the district court’s judgment was based in part on its conclusion that it could draw an adverse inference against the individual defendants who invoked their Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael S. Macko handled the case, which arose from an investigation led by the Defense Criminal Investigative Service.

Source: https://www.justice.gov/usao-edpa/pr/court-enters-judgment-against-new-jersey-couple-overcharging-military-spare-vehicle

Two Florida executives made their initial appearance in federal court on Sept. 7, 2018 on charges related to falsely-labeled hard body armor plates they provided to the United States government.

Both public sector procurement and private sector procurement are excellent fields full of incredibly talented people, but every so often problems still come up.

A New Jersey couple has been ordered to pay $232,891.37 to the United States for overcharging the military for light assemblies for munitions vehicles for the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA).

Search this Website