Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs

Stahr

Page Numbers wrong on contract.

Recommended Posts

Greetings Everyone,

I have an issue and we have been unable to find any documentation on it stating one way or the other, A colleague of mine has an issue with an Acceptor not accepting invoices due to the page numbers being wrong on the base contract. He is insistant he won't do it, she's insistant it's fine as is. I've asked her to fix it and she refuses. I'm not sure if she's taking it personal or not.

My question is two-fold:

1 - Is there a rule/guidance for something like this.

2 - Can the Vendor demand an administrative mod be done.

I ask the second question as that is what the Acceptor is trying to do right now. The contract is supposedly 50 pages long. The crux is that the first two pages are 1 of 50 and 2 of 50, then the pages become 3 of 39, 4 of 39 and so on. So really the contract is really only 39 pages. We've gotten quite a few opinions, but opinions aren't going to force this Acceptor to accept the invoices. Also, we can't swap to another Acceptor to get them to do it, it must go through him. Lastly, we know that if the Acceptor accepts it DFAS will pay it. We need to get this vendor paid.

Any help in this matter would be appreciated.

/R,

Stahr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the contract contain the clause at FAR 52.232-25, 26, or 27? If so, do the invoices conform to the requirements of the clause and of any other express contract terms for invoices? If the answers to those questions are yes, then there are no grounds for rejecting the invoices and failing to approve them is a serious breach.

I am not certain what you mean by "acceptor." If you mean the person who must accept or reject deliveries in accordance with FAR Subpart 46.5, then the CO can overule that person.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stahr, what do page numbers in the contract have to do with the acceptability of invoices? What is the specific problem here? Take a look at the definition of a claim in 52.233-1, particularly the last sentence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Vern,

Yes, I mean the person that must accept the invoices to eventually be process by DFAS. He' stating that it looks like there are two different contracts meshed together. I can see his point, but I also want resolution for my colleague before it gets out of hand.

Retreatfed,

He's worried that there could be something missing in the 11 pages that are not present. I understand his concern, but if I can prove it's ok to him or he's legal bound to do it, then all the better.

My thanks to both of you. I'm going to read the clauses posted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like the page numbering was from the original solicitation, and that when the award was made (i.e. by signing the actual offer), that sections K, L, & M account for the missing pages, or if a SF 1449, the Reps and Certs dropped off?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

VelHammer,

Can that really happen? I've never encountered this type of error before on anything I've done. Nor have I seen this anywhere else until this one contract. Would you be able to explain why this might of happened so we can avert this from happening, with her, in the future?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stahr:

Have someone look at the contract file starting with the solicitation, at least. Then follow the numbering scheme of the documents until you find the cause of the problem. When I read Velhammer's post, it rung a bell. I must have seen this before. Once you, or the other person, are sure of how it happened and can document it, explain (show it) to the person that is denying the invoices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure. I'm going to have to make a lot of assumptions since I don't know what type of contract. I imagine your agency uses some sort of automated contract writing system. I'm also assuming that whatever form was used is both a solicitation, offer, and award type of document (SF 33, SF1449, SF 1442). When the solicitation was released it had 50 pages because it contained solicitation provisions, reps and certs and evaluation criteria. The offeror submitted a proposal and signed the SF/DD or whatever form.

In the "old days", we made the award by counter-signing the document, writing in the new contract number and removed sections K, L,M. Distribution was made without renumbering the pages and included the contractor's hand written prices. Biggest point is: the contract contained both the offeror (contractor's) and the PCO's signatures on the document.

With the evolution of automated systems, the PCO can "release" the award, which automatically removes the provisions, reps & certs, and evaluation criteria, so the award document is now 39 pages. If the PCO wanted to have the distributed copies show both signatures, the PCO would replaced the two page award document (like a SF 1442, where the signatures are on page 2) that was generated by the system with the pages that had handwritten signatures and either hand-wrote on typed in the contract number. So the first two pages would show 50 pages, but the remaining pages (recently spit out by the system) would only show 39.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stahr -

How it happens is easy. Someone doesn't go into the Header/Footer and update the references when they drop off the sections. In my old shop we did not use continuous numbering for that reason - instead contract pages had section numbers (A-1, B-1, etc) So then when the CS did a Save As on the solicitation to use it as the basis of the award document and started deleting stuff, it wasn't a problem. And if the "of 50" part was typed in instead of using the reference functions for page numbering, then it's even easier to forget.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want to thank you all for the infomation shared. I believe I now have enough to force his hand. I will also be training my friend on how *not* to do this again. Thank you everyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would recommend contacting the contracting officer and asking him/her to review and advise the Acceptor. If the KO can state there are not missing pages and the page numbers were simply a clerical error or system issue, the Acceptor's concerns could easily be addressed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×