Skip to main content

B-222392, Oct 16, 1987, Office of General Counsel

B-222392 Oct 16, 1987
Jump To:
Skip to Highlights

Highlights

Relief is granted an Army supervising financial officer for an improper payment. General Hall: This is in response to your request of July 21. The improper payment occurred when a Treasury check representing the tax refund of Reginald and Bobette Woods was cashed over two fraudulent endorsements. In your request for reconsideration you have provided information furnished by Lieutenant Colonel Armstrong. Including a copy of the check cashing procedures in effect when the improper payment was made. It appears that the loss involved here was a result of criminal activity over which Lieutenant Colonel Armstrong had no control.

View Decision

B-222392, Oct 16, 1987, Office of General Counsel

APPROPRIATIONS/FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT - Accountable Officers - Relief - Illegal/Improper Payments - GAO Decisions - Reconsideration DIGEST: On reconsideration, relief is granted an Army supervising financial officer for an improper payment. Additional information submitted supports conclusion that the officer maintained and policed an adequate system of procedures and controls to avoid errors.

General Hall:

This is in response to your request of July 21, 1987, that we reconsider our decision to deny relief to Lt. Col. David B. Armstrong, Finance Corps, DSSN 6321, Finance and Accounting Officer 106th Area Finance Support Center, APO New York, for an improper payment of 5533. 06 in his account. On the basis of the additional information furnished in your submission, we grant relief.

The improper payment occurred when a Treasury check representing the tax refund of Reginald and Bobette Woods was cashed over two fraudulent endorsements. In our original decision, we denied relief because the record presented to us did not contain the necessary evidence to support a relief request under 31 U.S.C. Sec. 3527(c). However, in your request for reconsideration you have provided information furnished by Lieutenant Colonel Armstrong, including a copy of the check cashing procedures in effect when the improper payment was made, that demonstrate that Lieutenant Colonel Armstrong maintained an adequate system of procedures and controls to avoid errors and took steps to ensure the system's implementation and effectiveness. Therefore, it appears that the loss involved here was a result of criminal activity over which Lieutenant Colonel Armstrong had no control. Accordingly, on the basis of the information provided in your reconsideration request, we grant relief.

GAO Contacts

Office of Public Affairs