Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'dispute'.
Found 2 results
-
All, my company is having payment issues with our government customer (a civilian agency) and I'm at a loss trying to figure out the best way forward. I'm curious if anyone else has been in this situation. The government customer simply isn't paying invoices they approved more than a year ago for work they accepted under fully funded task orders. We’ve done everything we can think of to work this through the agency's chain of command, starting with the contracting officer. Multiple stakeholders at my company (including our VP) have repeatedly called the agency and had multiple MS Teams meetings (as well as in-person meetings) with the contracting officer, the COR and SES level personnel. The contracting officer and the COR have (on multiple occasions) tried to gain traction with their chain of command on our behalf, but it sounds like they aren’t getting anywhere either. The contracting office has confirmed there are no issues with our invoices and also confirmed that we are also eligible for interest on late payments. Even though the associated task orders are fully funded, I understand there may be significant cash flow issues within the agency. The contracting office receives CR funding from their HQ, on average, 1 1/2 months after the CR is approved. The agency also receives funding for certain task orders via MIPRs from sponsoring agencies. We are currently awaiting a MIPR for an upcoming training exercise; the sponsoring agency confirmed that our customer received the MIPR on 30 Jan, but the contracting office "never actually received it." We can always file a claim under the CDA, but if the contracting office has their hands tied and the issue is potentially originating from the top level, would it do any good? This could drag on for months, and we still aren't getting paid. Is there another approach we can take? Complaint to the agency's ombudsman or IG? -
It is my understanding that Direct Acquisition IAAs (those in which a federal employee is performing the services) are not covered under FAR Subpart 17.5 and therefore not covered by the Contracts Disputes Act but Assisted Acquisitions are covered by FAR Subpart 17.5 and therefore covered by the Contracts Disputes Act. Is this understanding correct?