The Justice Department is really starting to get aggressive about going after contractors that are billing them for services that were never rendered, and for poor quality work
(PRWEB) August 21, 2013
The Corporate Whistleblower Center is encouraging insiders at major highway construction company, that is falsely portraying themselves as a minority, or woman owned business to the federal government, to contact them immediately, because the reward potential can be so substantial for this type of information. These special category of contractors, fall under the federal classification of Disadvantaged Business Enterprises, also known as DBE, and involve woman, and minority-owned businesses working on federally-funded transportation projects. The only condition is the whistleblower's proof of this type of fraud must be well documented, easy to see, and involve contracts that exceed a million dollars.
The Corporate Whistleblower Center says, "On June 6th, 2013, the United States Department of Justice announced, Testech and Ceso Agree to Pay $2.88 Million to Resolve False Claims Act Allegations.The settlement announced today resolves allegations that the defendants claimed DBE status for TesTech, a civil engineering firm, on numerous highway and airport construction projects in Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, and Kentucky. The United States alleged that TesTech was owned and controlled by CESO, a non-DBE firm, and its owners, the Oakes, who falsely claimed that TesTech was owned by Aziz and qualified as a minority-owned business in order to take advantage of the DBE program. DBE fraud harms the integrity of the program and adversely impacts law-abiding, small business contractors trying to compete on a level playing field.” The Corporate Whistleblower Center believes this is a landmark situation, because they are convinced some highway contractors are misidentifying their company, or creating shell companies, that are not minority, or women owned businesses, and they encourage potential whistleblowers to contact them anytime at 866-714-6466, if they have proof of a construction company is involved in this type of activity.
Special Note from the Corporate Whistleblower Center:"According to the Justice Department's June 6th, 2013 press release, the whistleblower in this specific False Claim Act case will receive a $562,370 award."
Simple rules for a whistleblower from the Corporate Whistleblower Center:
- Do not go to the government first, if you are a major whistleblower. The Corporate Whistleblower Center says, "Major whistleblowers frequently go to the federal government thinking they will help. Its a huge mistake. Frequently government officials could care less, or they are incompetent."
- Do not go to the news media with your whistleblower information. Public revelation of a whistleblower's information could destroy any prospect for a reward.
- Do not try to force a government contractor, or corporation to come clean to the government about their wrongdoing. The Corporate Whistleblower Center says, "Fraud is so rampant among federal contractors, that any suggestion of exposure might result in an instant job termination, or harassment of the whistleblower. We say, come to us first, tell us what type of information you have, and if we think its sufficient, we will help find the right law firms, to assist in advancing your information."
Any type of insider, or employee, who possesses significant proof of their employer, or a government contractor fleecing the federal government is encouraged to contact to Corporate Whistleblower Center anytime at 866-714-6466, or they can contact the group via their web site at http://CorporateWhistleblowerCenter.Com
The Corporate Whistleblower Center says, "For attribution purposes we have attached a link to the United States Department of Justice press announcement June 6th 2013 national press release. http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2013/June/13-civ-650.html
The False Claims Act suit was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, and is captioned United States ex rel. Parker v. TesTech et al., No. 2:10-cv-1028 (S.D. Ohio).