Jim Boyle Dec. 9, 2014, 4:13pm


DHS Technologies LLC and its subsidiary, DHS Systems LLC, have agreed to pay $1.9 million, plus interest, to the United States to resolve allegations that it violated the False Claims Act by failing to disclose to the General Services Administration (GSA) that it offered greater discounts to a private company for the same items during the negotiation for the re-award of a government contract.

The agreement resolves allegations that in 2007 DHS failed to inform the GSA during contract re-award negotiations that products offered for sale to the United States and its agencies were offered for sale at lower prices to a commercial company.  This resulted in federal agencies paying more for the products from 2007 through 2013 than they would have had the GSA known about the lower prices.

Headquartered in Orangeburg, N.Y., DHS provides mobile shelters and trailer-mounted support systems for military, medical, government and civilian organizations around the world.  During the relevant time period, DHS conducted business in northeastern Pennsylvania, including with the Tobyhanna Army Depot.

“Companies doing business with the U.S. government should do their part to ensure that the military is guaranteed a fair price for the goods and services it needs to support our military men and women,” said Frank Robey, the director of the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command’s Major Procurement Fraud Unit, in a statement to the press.  “Those companies who abuse their contracts will find our special agents ready to hold the companies accountable for their illegal activities.”

The settlement arose from a lawsuit filed in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania in 2011 by a whistleblower under the qui tam provisions of the False Claims Act.  Under that law, private citizens can bring suit on behalf of the government for false claims and share in any recovery.  The False Claims Act further provides that the United States may intervene in the suit as it did in this case.

The claims resolved by the settlement are allegations only; there has been no determination of liability.

More News