Tag Archives: SDVOSB fraud

SmallGovCon Week In Review: August 15-19, 2016

Posted on by

With the Olympics coming to a close this Sunday, we can look forward to getting back to our usual sleeping patterns without the lure of athletes seeking gold in Rio. So while preparations are ongoing for the closing ceremony and the eventual torch hand off to Tokyo, we continue to work to bring you the top government contracting news and notes for the week.

In this week’s SmallGovCon Week in Review, a businessman will serve prison time after stealing a veteran’s identity and using it to obtain SDVOSB contracts, the first protest of the Alliant 2 solicitation has been filed, faulty military helmets manufactured at a Texas prison under a government contract have been recalled, and much more.

Continue reading →

SmallGovCon Week In Review: June 6-10, 2016

Posted on by

While we patiently await the Supreme Court’s pending decision in Kingdowmware Technologies, Inc. v. United States, there is still plenty happening in the world of government contracting.

This week’s edition of SmallGovCon Week In Review is packed with important news and commentary, including stories on the Army looking to end its ‘use it or lose it’ budgeting, the continued push for category management, a sneaker company looking to nix an exemption in the Berry Amendment, allegations of SDVOSB fraud, and much more.

Continue reading →

SDVOSB Fraud: $5 Million Settlement In Rent-A-Vet Case

Posted on by

A New York business has agreed to pay $5 million, plus interest, to resolve allegations that its CEO, President, and others engaged in a scheme to fraudulently obtain SDVOSB set-aside contracts.

According to a Department of Justice press release, the CEO and President of Hayner Hoyt Corporation created a company supposedly run by a service-disabled veteran.  However, the veteran in question was not involved in making important business decisions, but was instead responsible for overseeing Hayner Hoyt’s tool inventory and plowing snow from Hayner Hoyt’s property.  Although the DOJ is perhaps too polite to use the term “rent-a-vet” in its press release, that’s exactly what this scheme sounds like.

Continue reading →

SmallGovCon Week In Review: October 19-23, 2015

Posted on by

My poor, long-suffering Chicago Cubs will spend another winter without a World Series trophy.  Maybe next year the Cubbies will finally break the Curse of the Billy Goat.  In the meantime, there is plenty happening in the world of government contracting to keep my mind off of baseball.

In this week’s SmallGovCon Week In Review, a prison sentence is handed down in a SDVOSB fraud case while guilty pleas are entered in a separate case alleging DBE fraud, President Obama vetoes the 2016 NDAA, Carroll Bernard of GOVOLOGY provides an overview of the non-manufacturer rule, and much more.

Continue reading →

Procurement Fraud: Couple Pleads Guilty to $30 Million Scheme (And More)

Posted on by

A Maryland couple has pleaded guilty to defrauding the government in connection with more than $30 million in set-aside contracts.

And, apparently not content with “mere” procurement fraud, the couple has also entered guilty pleas to charges of fraud under the Service Contract Act and tax evasion.

Continue reading →

SDVOSB Indictment: Full-Time Postal Carrier Was SDVOSB “Rent-A-Vet”

Posted on by

The government has accused a service-disabled veteran who was employed full-time as a U.S. Postal Service Carrier is accused of being a “rent-a-vet” used to obtain contracts for his brother’s company.

According to a Department of Justice press release, a grand jury has indicted both men, as well as a business partner for SDVOSB fraud–and all three face the potential of significant jail time.

Continue reading →

SDVOSB Fraud: Company Dissolves To Settle “Rent-A-Vet” Allegations

Posted on by

A contractor has agreed to pay the government $1 million–and to dissolve as an ongoing entity–to resolve allegations that it falsely claimed SDVOSB status in order to receive VA SDVOSB set-aside contracts.

According to a government press release, the settlement comes after VA investigators alleged that the company’s non-veteran partner made all important corporate decisions, while the service-disabled veteran partner spent much of his time away from the company.

Continue reading →