Government Contractor Fraud
Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation overcharging Navy?
November 25th, 2014
The United States Department of Justice has filed a complaint against Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation, a subsidiary of Stratford, Connecticut-based United Technologies Corporation. The government alleges that Sikorsky engaged in illegal subcontracting practices with its vendors. If you believe that a company is engaged in unscrupulous charging practices, please contact our False Claims Act lawyer today at (845) 383-1728 to schedule your free consultation.
The complaint was brought against Sikorsky as a qui tam case under the False Claims Act. According to Acting Assistant Attorney General Joyce R. Branda, “Those who contract with the federal government and accept taxpayer dollars must follow the rules.” Sikorsky is accused of approving what is known as a cost-plus-a-percentage-of-cost subcontract with Derco Aerospace. Such contracts are illegal, and in this case, Sikorsky is further accused of having exploited this illegal subcontract to overcharge the United States Navy for parts used to maintain aircraft.
The False Claims Act allows private citizens to sue on behalf of the federal government as a so-called whistleblower, or qui tam relator. Under the Act, the individual may be entitled to up to 30 percent of the recovered damages in a successful qui tam case.
If you suspect that a company is defrauding the government it is your right and responsibility as a taxpayer to blow the whistle, and you may be entitled to a portion of the recovered damages. To learn how an experienced False Claims Act attorney can help you win your share of the claim, please contact the Law Office of James T. Ratner today at (845) 383-1728 to arrange a free consultation.
Agencies failing to comply with 2012 Whistleblower Protection Enhancement act
September 25th, 2014
Despite explicit provisions in the 2012 Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act (WPEA), federal agencies continue to eschew their responsibilities to comply.
The 2012 WPEA requires that government agencies name a Whistleblower Protection Ombudsman to ensure that employees understand the rights and protections that whistleblowers have under the law. These Ombudsmen are there to facilitate the relationship between whistleblowers and those upon whom the whistle is blown.
But according to a recent study conducted by the Project on Government Oversight (POGO), the inspectors general of the Department of Homeland Security, the U.S. Agency for International Development and the Railroad Retirement Board provide little to no information about their whistleblower programs. Failure to provide this information may be in direct violation of the 2012 WPEA.
Second Circuit Rules That World Trade Center Engineer Can Pursue Qui Tam Action
March 31st, 2014
In 2010, a structural engineer brought a qui tam suit in the Southern District of New York alleging that his employer had engaged in fraudulent billing practices for government projects, including the construction of One World Trade Center.
The qui tam relator moved to voluntarily dismiss his claim when neither the New York Attorney General nor the U.S. Attorney intervened. The case was dismissed with prejudice by the Southern District, meaning that the engineer could not bring the claim again.
In 2012, the engineer attempted to refile his claim after learning that the federal government was pursuing cases similar to his against the same defendants.
The Second Circuit ruled that his initial claim should have been dismissed without prejudice. The relator is free to file the claim again and pursue the qui tam action.
To speak with an experienced qui tam lawyer, please contact James T. Ratner by calling toll-free (845) 383-1728 today. All consultations are strictly confidential.