Jump to content

Recommended Posts

We currently use the National VA contract to purchase Food. We issue numerous delivery orders for different locations to deliver food through out the quarter. The delivery order has a certain dollar amount as well as an end date. Each locations were issued a log to track orders placed and were instructed that they must track all orders to ensure that they don’t exceed the funding on the delivery order for their location. Many of the locations are exceeding the dollar amount and continue to order food, since they have not reached the end date of the delivery order. Invoices come in, now we learn that we dont have enough money on the delivery order to cover the invoices.

My question is does this constitute a need for a ratifiaction or just a modifiacton to the delivery order to add the funds?

Thank you

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about a letter from the contracting officer to the contractor saying that the maximum or ceiling (however it is styled in the delivery order) has been reached and that the Government will not issue any more orders and that the Contractor must not accept or perform any more orders?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

See FAR 1.602-3( b )( 5 ).

But still, how about a letter from the contracting officer to the contractor saying that the maximum or ceiling (however it is styled in the delivery order) has been reached and that the Government will not issue any more orders and that the Contractor must not accept or perform any more orders?

Who is in control? Can the contractor take money from your agency for work that was not authorized by your contract?

But you want an answer, not advice. I understand -- sometimes we have to solve problems not of our own making. See FAR 1.602-3( b )( 5 ).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In this situation, with concurrence from my boss, my first steps would be, within the Government to process a ratification for every unauthorized procurement; and with the vendor to return every invoice in excess of the amount on the delivery order with a note that this is the reason the invoice is returned without action. Both tracks would play out from there. Regardless of outcome, the ordering offices would have strong motivation to clean up their act, and the vendor(s) would think twice about exceeding the funded amount on a delivery order.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I recommend that before you take any action you discuss with the VA CO.

While at face it appears the suggested avenues of this thread might be appropriate I am genuinely concerned that not one poster here knows the complete details of the contract, the subsequent order(s) and any terms and conditions relating authorized representatives and their authorities, contract management by contractor including adherence to ordering procedures, etc.

Lots of missing info and it would seem that sharing this in detial with the VA CO whould help you decide on the appropriate action to take with regard to the dleivery orders you are issuing under the VA contract. Or said another way I for one as a CO of record for the parent contract would not want a ordering officer on my multiagency/multioffice IDIQ taking any action before I was clued in on the full facts of what is going on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The question I would have is this: Did the contractor deliver the excess food on its own, or at the request of a government worker/manager at each location? Your original post indicates that it was the latter. If that is the case, then what you have is an unauthorized commitment. A government representative who lacked authority to obligate the government, knowingly ordered and accepted goods (food) in excess of what the contract stipulated. Time to process a ratification. And then get with the VISN-level manager (the CLO?) to get this process under control.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

VA1102,

If there a possibility of a claim under the Contract Disputes Act, might the original poster have a claim instead of a ratification? See FAR 1.602-3( b )( 5 ).

From what I can tell in the OP, the government ordered the items and the contractor delivered; the contractor is entitled to payment. However, since the obligation was made by an unauthorized individual and not the contracting officer, a ratification will have to be completed to authorize the payment. Now, should the government refuse payment, I could see grounds for a claim by the contractor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...