B-129104, SEP. 21, 1956

B-129104, SEP. 21, 1956

TO STAFF SERGEANT CHARLES E. JAMIESON, USAF:

YOUR LETTER OF AUGUST 20, 1956, REQUESTS REVIEW OF OUR SETTLEMENT DATED AUGUST 14, 1956, WHICH DISALLOWED YOUR CLAIM FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF YOUR WIFE'S TRAVEL FROM SAN RAFAEL, CALIFORNIA, TO CENTRAL FALLS, RHODE ISLAND, DECEMBER 18 TO 22, 1953, INCIDENT TO YOUR CHANGE OF STATION ORDERS DATED JUNE 2, 1953.

BY ORDERS DATED JUNE 2, 1953, HEADQUARTERS, 567TH AIR DEFENSE GROUP, MCCHORD AIR FORCE BASE, WASHINGTON, YOU WERE RELIEVED FROM ASSIGNMENT AND DUTY AT THAT STATION AND DIRECTED TO PROCEED TO A PORT OF EMBARKATION FOR MOVEMENT TO AN OVERSEAS DESTINATION. INCIDENT TO SUCH CHANGE OF STATION YOU EXECUTED A VOUCHER ON WHICH YOU CLAIMED REIMBURSEMENT FOR THE TRAVEL OF YOUR WIFE FROM SAN RAFAEL, CALIFORNIA, TO CENTRAL FALLS, RHODE ISLAND, DURING THE PERIOD JUNE 11 TO 16, 1953. ON THE BASIS OF YOUR CERTIFICATION THAT THE TRAVEL WAS PERFORMED AS CLAIMED, YOU WERE PAID $197.94 ON VOUCHER NO. 362, JULY 1953 ACCOUNTS OF CAPTAIN A. C. SCHILKE, SYMBOL 225-486. THIS TRAVEL HAD NOT BEEN PERFORMED AS CERTIFIED BY YOU IN YOUR CLAIM AND YOU REPAID THE SUM OF $197.94 TO THE GOVERNMENT AFTER AN EXCEPTION WAS TAKEN TO THE PAYMENT UPON THE AUDIT OF THE VOUCHER. ON MARCH 20, 1956, YOU SUBMITTED A CLAIM FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF YOUR WIFE'S TRAVEL FROM SAN RAFAEL, CALIFORNIA, TO CENTRAL FALLS, RHODE ISLAND, DURING THE PERIOD DECEMBER 18 TO 22, 1953, INCIDENT TO THE SAME CHANGE OF STATION ORDERS. THE CLAIM WAS DISALLOWED BY THE SETTLEMENT OF AUGUST 14, 1956.

IN YOUR LETTER OF AUGUST 20, 1956, YOU SAY YOU FEEL YOU ARE ENTITLED TO PAYMENT OF YOUR CLAIM FOR THE REASON THAT YOUR WIFE PERFORMED THE TRAVEL INCIDENT TO YOUR PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION ORDERS. YOUR RIGHT, HOWEVER, TO REIMBURSEMENT FOR THE TRANSPORTATION OF YOUR WIFE DOES NOT DEPEND ENTIRELY UPON THE FACT THAT SHE PERFORMED THE TRAVEL. THE JOINT TRAVEL REGULATIONS PROVIDE FOR REIMBURSEMENT FOR TRAVEL OF DEPENDENTS, WITHIN CERTAIN LIMITATIONS, AFTER THE TRAVEL HAS BEEN COMPLETED. YOU SAY THAT YOU WERE UNAWARE THAT THE TRAVEL HAD NOT BEEN PERFORMED ON THE DATES INDICATED ON THE VOUCHER ON WHICH YOU RECEIVED PAYMENT; NEVERTHELESS, YOU STATED IN THE VOUCHER THAT THE TRAVEL HAD BEEN PERFORMED ON SUCH DATES AND CERTIFIED THE VOUCHER AS BEING CORRECT IN ALL RESPECTS. SINCE YOUR WIFE HAD NOT PERFORMED THE TRAVEL, THE CLAIM WAS A FALSE CLAIM AND AS A RESULT YOU RECEIVED MONEYS TO WHICH YOU WERE NOT ENTITLED.

SECTION 2514, TITLE 28, OF THE U.S.C. PROVIDES:

"A CLAIM AGAINST THE UNITED STATES SHALL BE FORFEITED TO THE UNITED STATES BY ANY PERSON WHO CORRUPTLY PRACTICES OR ATTEMPTS TO PRACTICE ANY FRAUD AGAINST THE UNITED STATES IN THE PROOF, STATEMENT, ESTABLISHMENT, OR ALLOWANCE THEREOF.

"IN SUCH CASES THE COURT OF CLAIMS SHALL SPECIFICALLY FIND SUCH FRAUD OR ATTEMPT AND RENDER JUDGMENT OF FORFEITURE.'

THE FRAUDULENT PRESENTATION OF A CLAIM AGAINST THE UNITED STATES FOR A GREATER AMOUNT THAN IS DUE, OR FOR AN AMOUNT THAT IS NOT DUE, VITIATES AND DESTROYS THE CLAIMANT'S RIGHT IN THE ENTIRE CLAIM. IN SUCH A SITUATION, NO AMOUNT MAY BE PAID ON THE ACCOUNT EVEN THOUGH THE CLAIMANT LATER ALTERS HIS STATEMENT TO REFLECT THE TRUE FACTS AND THE ENTIRE PAYMENT ON THEIR FALSE VOUCHER MUST BE RECOVERED. IN YOUR CASE, YOU WERE NOT ENTITLED TO REIMBURSEMENT FOR YOUR WIFE'S TRAVEL FROM SAN RAFAEL TO CENTRAL FALLS, SINCE SHE HAD NOT TRAVELED FROM SAN RAFAEL AS ALLEGED. PAYMENT MAY NOT NOW BE MADE ON THE BASIS THAT SHE ACTUALLY TRAVELED FROM SAN RAFAEL TO CENTRAL FALLS INCIDENT TO YOUR CHANGE OF STATION AT A LATER DATE.

ACCORDINGLY, THE SETTLEMENT OF AUGUST 14, 1956, WAS CORRECT AND IS SUSTAINED.