B-174940, JUL 18, 1972
Highlights
WHICH WAS DENIED BY DECISION OF APRIL 20. ADVISING THAT THE AFFIDAVIT BY THE THIRD PARTY THAT THE GOVERNMENT AGENT SHOWED THE CONTRACTING PARTY THE WRONG PROPERTY IS INSUFFICIENT TO REVERSE A DECISION DENYING RECISSION WHERE THERE IS NO CORROBORATION FROM THE SALES OFFICE OF SUCH OCCURRENCE. INC.: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER DATED APRIL 28. WHICH CONCLUDED THAT THE RECORD FAILED TO SUPPORT YOUR CONTENTION THAT YOU WERE SHOWN THE WRONG ITEM OR THAT ANY PROPERTY WAS INSPECTED BY YOU PRIOR TO SUBMISSION OF YOUR BID AND DENIED YOUR CLAIM FOR RESCISSION OF SALES CONTRACT NO. 46 1141-014. IN YOUR LETTER YOU STATE THAT A PRIVATE PARTY ACCOMPANIED YOU ON THE INSPECTION AND YOU INQUIRE WHETHER OUR OFFICE WILL ACCEPT AN AFFIDAVIT FROM THAT INDIVIDUAL TO ESTABLISH THAT YOU WERE SHOWN THE WRONG PROPERTY BY GOVERNMENT PERSONNEL.
B-174940, JUL 18, 1972
SALES CONTRACTS - RECISSION - INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE CONCERNING A REQUEST FOR RECISSION OF SALES CONTRACT MADE BY J. J. CANDEE CO., INC., WHICH WAS DENIED BY DECISION OF APRIL 20, 1972, B 174940. ADVISING THAT THE AFFIDAVIT BY THE THIRD PARTY THAT THE GOVERNMENT AGENT SHOWED THE CONTRACTING PARTY THE WRONG PROPERTY IS INSUFFICIENT TO REVERSE A DECISION DENYING RECISSION WHERE THERE IS NO CORROBORATION FROM THE SALES OFFICE OF SUCH OCCURRENCE.
TO J. J. CANDEE CO., INC.:
REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER DATED APRIL 28, 1972, WHEREIN YOU REFER TO OUR DECISION OF APRIL 20, 1972, WHICH CONCLUDED THAT THE RECORD FAILED TO SUPPORT YOUR CONTENTION THAT YOU WERE SHOWN THE WRONG ITEM OR THAT ANY PROPERTY WAS INSPECTED BY YOU PRIOR TO SUBMISSION OF YOUR BID AND DENIED YOUR CLAIM FOR RESCISSION OF SALES CONTRACT NO. 46 1141-014.
IN YOUR LETTER YOU STATE THAT A PRIVATE PARTY ACCOMPANIED YOU ON THE INSPECTION AND YOU INQUIRE WHETHER OUR OFFICE WILL ACCEPT AN AFFIDAVIT FROM THAT INDIVIDUAL TO ESTABLISH THAT YOU WERE SHOWN THE WRONG PROPERTY BY GOVERNMENT PERSONNEL.
THE PROPERTY DISPOSAL OFFICER HAS REPRESENTED THAT EVERYONE IN THE PROPERTY DISPOSAL BRANCH WAS BUSY WORKING ON THE AUCTION FOR ANOTHER SALE ON THE DAY IN QUESTION AND THAT NO GOVERNMENT PERSONNEL WERE AVAILABLE TO ACCOMPANY ANYBODY FOR A PROPERTY INSPECTION ON THE IMMEDIATE SALE. FURTHER, THERE IS AN ABSENCE OF ANY RECORD OF AN APPOINTMENT FOR SUCH AN INSPECTION AS IS CUSTOMARY FOR THE SALES OFFICE. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE SUGGESTED AFFIDAVIT WITHOUT CORROBORATION FROM THE SALES OFFICE WOULD BE OF QUESTIONABLE VALUE FOR FAVORABLE CONSIDERATION OF YOUR CLAIM.
WITH REGARD TO YOUR QUESTION AS TO WHAT ALTERNATIVES ARE AVAILABLE TO YOU BEYOND THE GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE, YOU ARE ADVISED THAT THE DECISIONS OF OUR OFFICE ARE NOT APPEALABLE TO ANY OTHER DEPARTMENT OR AGENCY. HOWEVER, DISALLOWANCE OF CLAIMS BY OUR OFFICE DOES NOT AFFECT THE RIGHTS OF CONTRACTORS TO PURSUE ANY JUDICIAL REMEDIES WHICH MAY BE AVAILABLE TO THEM IN THE COURTS.