B-124913, MAR. 26, 1956
Highlights
TO NU-PAKO PRODUCTS CO.: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER DATED FEBRUARY 14. THE AMOUNT STATED TO BE DUE BY REASON OF AN ERROR ALLEGED TO HAVE BEEN MADE IN YOUR BID ON WHICH PURCHASE ORDER NO. IS BASED. YOUR CLAIM WAS DISALLOWED BY SETTLEMENT OF OUR OFFICE DATED JULY 14. UPON REVIEW THE ACTION WAS SUSTAINED BY DECISION TO YOU OF OCTOBER 3. " YOU ARE ADVISED THAT APPEALS TO THAT BOARD MUST BE PRESENTED BY THE CLAIMANT OR HIS ATTORNEY. YOU ARE FURTHER ADVISED THAT DECISIONS OF THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES ARE BINDING UPON THE EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND ESTABLISHMENTS AND NO USEFUL PURPOSE WOULD BE SERVED BY SUCH AN APPEAL. ONCE THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL HAS CERTIFIED THAT NO BALANCE IS DUE A CONTRACTOR THE ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS CANNOT TAKE JURISDICTION TO HOLD OTHERWISE. 31 U.S.C. 44 AND 74.
B-124913, MAR. 26, 1956
TO NU-PAKO PRODUCTS CO.:
REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER DATED FEBRUARY 14, 1956, RELATIVE TO YOUR CLAIM FOR $1,798, THE AMOUNT STATED TO BE DUE BY REASON OF AN ERROR ALLEGED TO HAVE BEEN MADE IN YOUR BID ON WHICH PURCHASE ORDER NO. O.I. 16168, DATED JUNE 10, 1952, IS BASED.
YOUR CLAIM WAS DISALLOWED BY SETTLEMENT OF OUR OFFICE DATED JULY 14, 1953, AND UPON REVIEW THE ACTION WAS SUSTAINED BY DECISION TO YOU OF OCTOBER 3, 1955, B-124913. YOUR PRESENT LETTER FURNISHED NO INFORMATION OR EVIDENCE NOT PREVIOUSLY CONSIDERED, AND, THEREFORE, AFFORDS NO BASIS FOR MODIFICATION OR REVISION OF THE PRIOR ACTION IN THE MATTER.
REFERRING TO YOUR REQUEST THAT THE CLAIM BE TURNED OVER TO "THE BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS, WASHINGTON 25, D.C., " YOU ARE ADVISED THAT APPEALS TO THAT BOARD MUST BE PRESENTED BY THE CLAIMANT OR HIS ATTORNEY. YOU ARE FURTHER ADVISED THAT DECISIONS OF THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES ARE BINDING UPON THE EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND ESTABLISHMENTS AND NO USEFUL PURPOSE WOULD BE SERVED BY SUCH AN APPEAL. ONCE THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL HAS CERTIFIED THAT NO BALANCE IS DUE A CONTRACTOR THE ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS CANNOT TAKE JURISDICTION TO HOLD OTHERWISE. 31 U.S.C. 44 AND 74; BROOKS CALLOWAY COMPANY V. UNITED STATES, 97 C.CLS. 689; AND ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS CASE NO. 2486, DECIDED MAY 4, 1955. YOUR ATTENTION IS INVITED GENERALLY TO 28 U.S.C. 1346 AND 1491, PERTAINING TO SUITS AGAINST THE UNITED STATES WHICH ARE COGNIZABLE IN THE DISTRICT COURTS AND THE COURT OF CLAIMS OF THE UNITED STATES.