Government Contracts Fraud

November 23, 2015

As the Holidays Approach, Defense Contractor Settles Suit Alleging It Overcharged for Produce

As we prepare for our upcoming holiday feasts, our thoughts go out to those who are serving our country and are unable to be with their families for the holidays. We give thanks to them and to their families and hope they all get to enjoy a special meal wherever they may be. In an ironic twist, one of the latest settlements in the government contracts fraud arena involves a company that agreed to supply produce to our servicepersons. The allegations are yet another reminder of the very real impact of government fraud, which takes money from taxpayer-funded coffers and, in the case of defense contract fraud, depletes funds needed for our nation’s defense and the protection of those who serve. We believe those who blow the whistle on government fraud are, like the men and women in the military, true Americans and our defense contract fraud law firm is proud to help.

DOJ Alleges California Company Overcharged for Produce, Violated Defense Contract, and Obstructed Investigation

Earlier this month, the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) announced that Coast Produce Company (“Coast”), a California company, agreed to pay $4 million to resolve contract fraud allegations. The settlement applies to both civil and criminal lawsuits alleging False Claims Act (“FCA”) violations and claims Coast obstructed a federal investigation. Coast also agreed to institute measures to ensure future compliance. It is important to note that Coast did not admit wrongdoing and the claims in the various suits remain allegations only.

October 19, 2015

Spotlight on Government Contracts Fraud: The Danger of Overcharging and Other Frauds Involving Military Contracts

by Gregory J. Brod

We are lucky to live in a nation where men and women are willing to put their lives on the line, forming a volunteer military that protects our country and its people. In turn, we all must help support this military and help keep them safe. This is why our firm is taking part in the fight against defense contractor fraud. A number of well-publicized aviation tragedies makes a case involving a major aircraft manufacturer particularly concerning, even if the allegations are focused on military planes and allege overbilling rather than underperforming. Tolerating one form of fraud almost ensures other cases will follow, possibly including companies taking dangerous shortcuts. It is more important than ever for private citizens come forward and partner with experts like our defense contracts fraud lawyer to fight government fraud in all forms — there is often far more than just money at stake.

Aircraft Manufacturer Pays $18 Million to Settle Claims of Overcharging on Defense Contracts

Last Wednesday, the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) issued a press release announcing that The Boeing

September 21, 2015

The Many Uses of the False Claims Act: Beyond Medicare Fraud and Military Contracts

by Gregory J. Brod

As a False Claims Act law firm, we are always interested to find out what people know about the law, a fundamental issue given the large role private citizens play in bring False Claims Act (“FCA” or “the Act”) lawsuits. One of the things we’ve learned is that even the people who are familiar with the law are surprised to learn the wide variety of contexts in which it can apply. Likewise, its many state counterparts are versatile tools for the fight against fraud.

Overview of the False Claims Act

The Legal Information Institute (“LII”) at Cornell University Law School explains that the FCA is a “[f]ederal statute setting criminal and civil penalties for falsely billing the government, over-representing the amount of a delivered product, or under-stating an obligation to the government.” Although not emphasized in the LII article, false claims only violate the Act if made knowingly, with deliberate ignorance, or willful disregard of the claim’s falsity (see The False Claims Act: A Primer published by the Department of Justice (“DOJ”)).

September 14, 2015

Who Brings Government Fraud Whistleblower Claims?

by Gregory J. Brod

We frequently write about healthcare fraud and other forms of government contract fraud. We cannot overemphasize the role that whistleblowers play in prosecuting these cases. According to the Justice Department, nearly $3 billion of the $5.69 billion recovered through settlements and judgments in civil False Claims Act (“FCA”) litigation in Fiscal Year 2014 stemmed from qui tam lawsuits filed by private whistleblowers. Who are these whistleblowers? In some cases, they are high-ranking executives in companies that committed fraud. However, whistleblowers can also be “rank and file” employees, the “everyday” workers who form the majority of any large operation, or even company outsiders. Our law firm for government fraud whistleblowers works with people from all ranks of society who take step forward and join the fight against fraud.

Settlement In Suit Brought By Medical Technician

Last month, the Sacramento Bee reported that Quest Diagnostics agreed to pay $1.8 million to settle Medicare fraud claims. According to the allegations, Quest submitted duplicate claims for Medicare reimbursement for the same test performed on a single day and a single patient. A Quest spokesperson suggested IT issues caused rare cases of duplicate payments impacting a “miniscule percentage” of the company’s annual Medicare claims and said Quest is updating its billing systems to prevent a recurrence.

August 3, 2015

Spotlight on Government Contracting Fraud: False Data Fuels Fraud in Program Providing Work Opportunities for the Disabled

by Gregory J. Brod

This week, CNN reported on rampant abuse in the federally-funded programs that help provide job opportunities for the severely disabled. Sadly, the current investigations are just the latest chapter in a series of problems with fraud and abuse in this area. If the allegations are true, this is yet another example of scammers taking taxpayer money and using it to line their own pockets rather than to support the noble cause for which it was marked. Fraud in AbilityOne and other government programs is a serious issue and our government contract fraud law firm works with honest whistleblowers to root out these frauds and return funds to these important initiatives.

DoJ Joins Other Agencies Investigating Work Program for the Disabled

CNN reported last week that the Department of Justice (“DoJ”) has joined several other government offices investigating allegations of fraud involving AbilityOne, the leading federally-funded program helping the blind and severely disabled find work, and SourceAmerica, the nonprofit agency that manages the program. AbilityOne uses some $3 billion of taxpayer money annually to fund contracts nationwide. In order to hold an AbilityOne contract, blind and/or seriously disabled individuals unable to hold another job must perform 75% or more of the company’s work.

July 20, 2015

Whistleblowers’ Law Firm Alert: For-Profit Schools Committing Federal Student Aid Fraud

by Gregory J. Brod

For-profit schools provide an education to many students who might otherwise be unable to attend post-secondary school. However, these schools have a dual mission: a commitment to educating students and a commitment to earning money for investors and shareholders. While many, perhaps most, are ethical and education-oriented, some for-profit schools misuse federal student aid funds perpetuating scams that hurt the government and students alike. Today, our false claims act law firm looks at federal student loan fraud and reminds readers of the importance of whistleblowers in all government fraud cases.

Education Affiliates Pays $13 Million to Resolve False Claims Allegations

On June 24, the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) announced that Education Affiliates (“EA”) agreed to pay $13 million to settle False Claims Act (“FCA”) claims against the for-profit institution. EA operates 50 campuses providing post-secondary training in a range of fields in five states. The suits were brought by five whistleblowers who will share approximately $1.8million under the FCA’s qui tam provisions. EA denies any wrongdoing.

June 29, 2015

Spotlight on Government Contracts Fraud: The Threat of Government Set-Aside Fraud

by Gregory J. Brod

It shouldn’t surprise us anymore, but it’s the type of fraud that surprises anyone who believes in supporting the American dream. We’ve seen it before and, sadly, we know we’ll see it again – people taking advantage of programs intended to help small businesses succeed, especially businesses run by our country’s veterans and/or historically disadvantaged groups. We take solace in the people we work with, those who step forward and say, “This isn’t right.” As a law firm for whistleblowers in defense contract fraud cases, we rely on honest individuals to help us fight government set-aside fraud and we are committed to protecting their interests, including ensuring they receive due compensation if their time, effort, and information leads to the recovery of government funds.

Four Charged With SBA Fraud

Last week, the Justice Department announced an indictment formally charging four individuals with defrauding Small Business Administration grant programs to obtain $24 million in unlawful profits. The SBA operates programs that help businesses owned and controlled by disabled veterans and socially or economically disadvantaged individuals compete for government contracts. In order to qualify, the business must be unconditionally owned and controlled by a qualified individual.

May 18, 2015

When Competitors Collaborate and Costs Rise: Government Contract Fraud Attorney on Bid Rigging

by Gregory J. Brod

In many ways, government procurement contracts are similar to procurement agreements in the private sphere. The basic elements of all contracts are the same, an offer and acceptance made between two or more competent parties for a legal purpose that creates obligations for both parties (e.g. payment for and the provision of goods/services). However, the government contract system is much more controlled than the private contracting sphere. The government contract bidding process is complex, highly-regulated process that relies upon companies filing honest, competitive offers to fill a given need. Bid rigging is a violation of government trust and a form of government contract fraud. As a bid rigging whistleblowers’ law firm, the Brod Law Firm partners with individuals who see this fraud happen and step forward to report it. When fraud occurs in the private sphere, the companies involved can suffer. When fraud occurs in the government contracting arena, the trust of every American is violated and every taxpayer suffers.

Bid Rigging: Overview and Forms

A useful explanation of bid rigging can be found in a Department of Justice contract2 (“DOJ”) primer written to help people identify various forms of collusion among prospective government contractors. As the primer explains, at a broad level, bid rigging involves competitors conspiring to raise the price of goods/services being purchased by the government. Bid rigging occurs when competitors agree who will submit the best offer during the bidding process, agreements that eliminate/limit true competition. In some cases, the collusion involves some, not all, of the bidders for a given project. Although the primer focuses on antitrust matters, bid rigging can also be a violation of the False Claims Act.

March 16, 2015

A Question of Trust – Excluding the Perpetrators of Fraud from Future Government Contracting Opportunities

by Gregory J. Brod

Government contracting fraud is a crime of opportunity. It involves wrongs perpetrated by people who are in a position of trust. It is a crime that amounts to stealing from the government at best; at worst, it can put our military at risk or pose a threat to public health/welfare. Once an individual has been convicted of government contracting fraud, should they be afforded the opportunity to hold a leadership role in a company that contracts with the government again? Can we trust them? In this post our government contract fraud attorney looks at one state’s proposal that addresses that very issue and also at how government contract exclusions operate in the health care arena.

New Jersey Proposes Permanent Ban for Key Employees Convicted of Government Contract Fraud

Last month, news site NJ.com reported on a bill moving through the New Jersey legislature that would create a one-strike rule for government contractors. If passed, the bill would create a permanent bar preventing a person convicted of second-degree government fraud from ever again serving as a “key employee” in a company that holds government contracts. The bill would only apply to higher-level employees, a group that ranges from C-level executives, presidents, and vice-presidents to directors and supervisory managers. The focus is on decision-makers and it does not impact the day-to-day employees who may be “caught up” in a fraudulent contracting scheme. Under the proposed legislation, New Jersey’s state treasurer would be tasked with maintaining an online list of those individuals who are subject to the permanent ban. Companies in the state would have to provide a written certification stating they do not employ any of the named individuals before being allowed to receive a government contract.

February 16, 2015

Decision Expands Reach of the False Claims Act and Helps Fight Government Fraud

by Gregory J. Brod

We are honored to work alongside brave and honest individuals as a government contracts fraud law firm. Attorney Brod has a deep understanding of the laws that allows private whistleblowers to fight back against scammers who commit fraud against the government and partners with such individuals on cases nationwide. Many of these cases rely on a law that dates back to the Civil War and that was substantially amended in the mid-1980s, the False Claims Act (“FCA”). Despite over 150 year of history, the law continues to be examined and interpreted including on the crucial question of whether a contract violation in itself can support an FCA action, a theory referred to as “implied certification.”

Background of the Badr Case – Contractor Accused of Providing Security Forces Who Did Not Meet Marksmanship Requirements

Last month, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals (a critical jurisdiction since, although it doesn’t include Washington D.C. itself, it includes areas around D.C. where many federal contractors operate), released an opinion endorsing the implied certification theory in FCA actions. The issue arose as the court evaluated the dismissal of certain portions of the Complaint filed in United States ex rel. Badr v. Triple Canopy Inc., ultimately affirming part of the lower court’s ruling and dismissing other portions of that decision. In doing so, the circuit joined several other jurisdictions (including state courts interpreting California’s version of the FCA) in embracing the implied certification concept.