brian Posted June 8, 2009 Report Share Posted June 8, 2009 . I don't know the merits of these protests, https://acquisition.army.mil/asfi/justifica...E_EXTENSION=pdf but they sure have benefited the protestor if for no other reason than because the Government has had to extend the earlier contract for 2 years with 3 bridge contracts to have time to answer the protests. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
formerfed Posted June 8, 2009 Report Share Posted June 8, 2009 I worked at an agency where the incumbent contractor had very little competition for over 20 years. The agency decided they really wanted competition and took many steps to ensure that happened. The incumbent became worried as he saw other companies finally become contenders. He filled several protests including the Court of Claims and stretched out the contract award for three years. There was a practice nicknamed ?Fedmail? that became way too common when GSA's Board of Contract Appeals heard IT protests. Companies would file protests and would withdraw them if agencies agreed to reimburse legal and B&P costs. The sad thing is many agencies didn't even substantiate the amount - they just agreed to pay "$X" if the protester withdrew. Here's a link to a GSBCA decision http://www.gsbca2.gsa.gov/oldprotests/d115520.txt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Vern Edwards Posted June 8, 2009 Report Share Posted June 8, 2009 .I don't know the merits of these protests, https://acquisition.army.mil/asfi/justifica...E_EXTENSION=pdf but they sure have benefited the protestor if for no other reason than because the Government has had to extend the earlier contract for 2 years with 3 bridge contracts to have time to answer the protests. The tactic of protesting in order to gain an extension is as old as the hills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.gif)
Recommended Posts