Qui Tam False Certification Whistleblower Lawyer Jason Coomer handles false certification qui tam whistleblower lawsuits where whistleblowers and relators seek compensation on the government's behalf from companies and people that have defrauded taxpayers out of government money.  Any False Certification or Fraud made to the United States Government for the purpose of obtaining money can create a potential Qui Tam Federal False Claims Act Lawsuit.

If you are aware of Medicare Fraud, Defense Contractor Fraud, Government Contractor Fraud, Public Works Fraud, Stimulus Fraud, or other government fraud and are the original source with special knowledge of fraud and want to be a whistleblower and an American Hero, please feel free to contact False Certification Whistleblower Fraud Lawyer Jason Coomer via e-mail message or use our submission form about a potential Qui Tam False Claim Whistleblower lawsuit regarding health care fraud, defense contract fraud, or other government fraud. 

Federal Spending, Government Fraud Lawsuits, Federal False Claims Lawsuits, False Certification Claims Lawsuits, and Qui Tam Lawsuits

Over the past several years spending by the Federal government has increased substantially including Medicare and Health Care Spending, Defense Spending, Public Works Spending, Bailout Spending, Road Construction Spending, Local Government Spending, and Public Health Spending.  For more information on Federal government spending, please go to the following web pages on Federal government spending Fedspending.org,  Stimulus Plan, USASpending.gov, and Recovery.gov.

With the sharp increase in Federal Government Spending has come unethical wrongdoers, that have committed fraud, made false claims, and submitted false certifications in order to steal millions and even billions of dollars from the United States Government.  To prevent theft and fraud, the government has recently enacted regulation that expands the Federal False Claims Act and expands protections for whistleblowers.  This expansion of the Federal False Claims Act was intended to encourage whistleblowers to step forward and blow the whistle on fraud against the government to which they have specialized knowledge and are the original source.  The expansion also provides new protections to protect whistleblowers from retaliation for filing false claims act claims. 

Under the Federal False Claims Act, fraudulent or false claims by persons or corporations made for payment or approval by the United States Government can be the basis of relator qui tam claims in which the relator or whistleblower can obtain a portion of the money recovered by the government for exposing the fraud.  Whistleblowers have successfully helped the United States Government recover Billions of Dollars for wrongdoers.  Some common area of fraud against the United States Government  include government contractors seeking payment for services not provided; government contractors over billing and double billing; health care providers seeking Medicare reimbursement for services not provided or upcoded services; Pharmaceutical companies seeking Medicare payments for off-label drugs, patent fraud, defective vaccine fraud, or poor quality goods; defense contractors seeking payment for poor quality products, defective weapons, or not provide services; road contractors falsely certifying services completed or hours worked; TARP recipients making false statements to obtain TARP funds; and subcontractors falsely certifying services or goods were provided when they were not.

Many other forms of fraud that can lead to successful qui tam claims also exist.  The key is to obtain evidence of a fraudulent act or false certification that has been made for the purpose of obtaining money from the United States government.   To be a successful qui tam claim the relator must be the original source with specialized knowledge of the fraud.

---

§ 3729. False Claims

(a) LIABILITY FOR CERTAIN ACTS

(1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to paragraph (2), any person who—

(A) knowingly presents, or causes to be presented, a false or fraudulent claim for payment or approval;

(B) knowingly makes, uses, or causes to be made or used, a false record or statement material to a false or fraudulent claim;

(C) conspires to commit a violation of subparagraph (A), (B), (D), (E), (F), or (G);

(D) has possession, custody, or control of property or money used, or to be used, by the Government and knowingly delivers, or causes to be delivered, less than all of that money or property;

(E) is authorized to make or deliver a document certifying receipt of property used, or to be used, by the Government and, intending to defraud the Government, makes or delivers the receipt without completely knowing that the information on the receipt is true;

(F) knowingly buys, or receives as a pledge of an obligation or debt, public property from an officer or employee of the Government, or a member of the Armed Forces, who lawfully may not sell or pledge property; or

(G) knowingly makes, uses, or causes to be made or used, a false record or statement material to an obligation to pay or transmit money or property to the Government, or knowingly conceals or knowingly and improperly avoids or decreases an obligation to pay or transmit money or property to the Government, is liable to the United States Government for a civil penalty of not less than $5,000 and not more than $10,000, as adjusted by the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990 (28 U.S.C. 2461 note; Public Law 104-410), plus 3 times the amount of damages which the Government sustains because of the act of that person.

---

Common Types of Defense Contractor Fraud and False Certifications that Lead to False Claims Act Lawsuits

Defense contractor fraud is a common way that government contractors defraud the United States Government and taxpayers out of large amounts of money.  Many whistle blowers have been successful in blowing the whistle on fraudulent defense contractors to reveal fraud schemes that put our troops in danger and steal money from the United States.  Under False Claims Act litigation billions of dollars are regained from these fraudulent defense contractors.  Some common ways defense contractors cheat the government are False Certification of Product Quality, Product Substitution, Cross Charging, False Certification of Services Provided, Charging for Services or Goods not provided, and Violations of the Truth-in-Negotiations Act ("TINA"), and Improper Cost Allocation.

False Certification of Product Quality commonly occurs after a product has been approved for mass production.  The original prototypes of a product are typically created with high quality materials and parts including strong metals, seals, plastics, and components.  However, after the original prototypes have been tested and approved, some defense contractors use inferior parts and materials to lower costs that make weapons, ships, vehicles, computers, electronics, and other military goods less reliable, weaker, and more prone to not work when needed.  The defense contractor that provides a false certification of a product's quality has committed a false certification that may subject the defense contractor to a False Certification of Product Quality False Claims Act Law Suit.

The Defense of Department often requires its contractors to build weapons systems in accordance with very detailed product specifications because quality and reliability are critical with weapons systems and other military equipment. Failure to comply with these specifications and falsely certifying that these specifications were met can cause death and place our troops in danger.  As such it is extremely important that  appropriate quality assurance steps are taken in building or producing weapons systems and other military equipment and that a defense contractor's certification of compliance with these specifications can be trusted.

Similar to False Certification of Product Quality Qui Tam Claims are Product Substitution False Claims.  These claims occur when a Defense Contractor that is under a government contract that specifies that the defense contractor build products using a certain grade, quality of parts, or materials & parts from American companies, fails to comply with the contract. These Defense Contractors often decide it is more profitable to use or substitute inferior parts or parts not made by American companies.  Defense Contractors that use inferior parts or parts not made by American Companies as required by their government contract may be subject to a Product Substitution False Claim Act Law Suit.

For more information on Defense Contractor False Certification Qui Tam Whistleblower Lawsuits, please go to the following webpage, Defense Contractor False Certification Claims Lawyer.

Defense Contractor Fraud Claims in the News

The United States Department of Defense spending for goods and services in Fiscal Year 2007 exceeded $300 billion.  With this increased budget has come relaxed oversight and regulation.  Quality control and proper testing of these good and services has become lax as documentation for large defense contracts has been reduced allowing fraudulent contractors to get away with defrauding the Pentagon, Department of Defense, and United States.

Recently several news stories have surfaced regarding suspected defense contractor fraud and government contractor fraud.  Below are brief exerts of some news stories on potential Defense Contractor Fraud Claims and Government Contractor Fraud Claims.  For more information follow the links to these stories.

For more information on Defense Contractor Fraud Qui Tam Whistleblower Lawsuits, please go to the following webpage, Defense Contractor Fraud Qui Tam Claim Lawyer.

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (February 2009)

In February 2009, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 was signed into law which includes significant new whistleblower provisions. Section 1553 of the Act prohibits any private employer or state or local government that receives any funds pursuant to the Act from retaliating against an employee who discloses, internally or externally, information that the employee reasonably believes constitutes evidence of one or more of a number of specified improper uses of stimulus funds, including gross mismanagement of an agency contract or grant, gross waste of covered funds, or an abuse of authority related to the implementation or use of covered funds. Section 1553 establishes procedures and damage remedies that are similar in some ways to those with which many employers are familiar under Section 806 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act ("SOX"), but its whistleblower provisions go beyond the whistleblower protections of SOX in several respects.

Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act of 2009 (May 2009)

In May 2009, the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act of 2009 was signed into law which makes important amendments to the country's most important tool for fighting fraud, the False Claims Act.  This new Federal False Claim Act Legislation will protect hundreds of billions spent on government programs from fraud and government waste and expand the ability of whistleblowers to collect compensation.

This Act amends the False Claims Act to: (1) expand liability under such Act for making false or fraudulent claims to the federal government; and (2) apply liability under such Act for presenting a false or fraudulent claim for payment or approval (currently limited to such a claim presented to an officer or employee of the federal government). Requires persons who violate such Act to reimburse the federal government for the costs of a civil action to recover penalties or damages.  The Act also modifies and expands provisions of the False Claims Act relating to intervention by the federal government in civil actions for false claims, sharing of information by the Attorney General with a claimant, retaliatory relief, and service upon state or local authorities in sealed cases.

The Act also redefines "claim" to include claims submitted "to a contractor, grantee, or other recipient, if the money or property is to be spent or used on the Government's behalf or to advance a Government program or interest."  This language makes explicit the ability of Government and whistleblowers to pursue subcontractors and grantees.  This expansion will create potential liability to health care providers and other businesses that contract with government programs including Medicaid and Medicare.

The Act also redefines "obligation" to include "an established duty, whether or not fixed," arising from a variety of relationships, and specifically includes obligations "arising from statute or regulation, or from the retention of any overpayment."  This change allows the government and whistleblower to pursue violations of regulatory statutes with penalty provisions as False Claims Act Case and pursue false documents which are "material to an obligation to pay or transmit money...to the Government" regardless of whether a false claim has been submitted.  For example, a government contractor who backdates records to support a claim already submitted could be liable under this expansion.

The Act also expand the anti-retaliation provisions from only employees to include "contractors and agents" who "act to stop one or more violations."  This expanded protection could extend to contractors in government-funded managed care plans who take action to stop false reporting or illegal denial of service by the plan.

These expansions to the Federal False Claims Act should increase the number of Federal False Claims Act Lawsuits and allow the Federal Government to crack down on fraud and wasteful spending as well as recoup money that has been fraudulently obtained.

The Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act also expands federal fraud laws to encompass independent mortgage companies, which are not currently covered by antifraud statutes that apply to traditional banks. Such independent mortgage companies originated approximately half of all subprime loans in 2005 and 2006. The bill defines a financial institution that will be covered by the fraud statutes as any business that finances or refinances mortgages. The Act expands the mortgage-related violations that are subject to both criminal and civil punishments. Additionally, the legislation makes it a crime to appraise a property falsely, an effort to prevent the purposeful inflation of home value appraisals that contributed to the housing bubble and the resulting housing crisis.

The Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act strengthens protections against attempts to defraud the federal government, particularly through the Troubled Asset Relief Program and the economic stimulus package; expands the financial instruments that are covered by the securities fraud statute; and clarifies a money laundering statute. The Act provides $490 billion in spending for investigation and prosecution of mortgage fraud, securities fraud, and fraud cases involving federal economic assistance.

Federal False Claims Act and Qui Tam Lawsuits

Below is the Federal False Claims Act with the above discussed recent amendments:

---

THE FEDERAL FALSE CLAIMS ACT

31 U.S.C. §§ 3729-3730 As amended, May 2009

---

§ 3729. False Claims

(a) LIABILITY FOR CERTAIN ACTS

(1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to paragraph (2), any person who—

(A) knowingly presents, or causes to be presented, a false or fraudulent claim for payment or approval;

(B) knowingly makes, uses, or causes to be made or used, a false record or statement material to a false or fraudulent claim;

(C) conspires to commit a violation of subparagraph (A), (B), (D), (E), (F), or (G);

(D) has possession, custody, or control of property or money used, or to be used, by the Government and knowingly delivers, or causes to be delivered, less than all of that money or property;

(E) is authorized to make or deliver a document certifying receipt of property used, or to be used, by the Government and, intending to defraud the Government, makes or delivers the receipt without completely knowing that the information on the receipt is true;

(F) knowingly buys, or receives as a pledge of an obligation or debt, public property from an officer or employee of the Government, or a member of the Armed Forces, who lawfully may not sell orpledge property; or

(G) knowingly makes, uses, or causes to be made or used, a false record or statement material to an obligation to pay or transmit money or property to the Government, or knowingly conceals or knowingly and improperly avoids or decreases an obligation to pay or transmit money or property to the Government, is liable to the United States Government for a civil penalty of not less than $5,000 and not more than $10,000, as adjusted by the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990 (28 U.S.C. 2461 note; Public Law 104-410), plus 3 times the amount of damages which the Government sustains because of the act of that person.

(2) REDUCED DAMAGES.— If the court finds that—

(A) the person committing the violation of this subsection furnished officials of the United States responsible for investigating false claims violations with all information known to such person about the violation within 30 days after the date on which the defendant first obtained the information;

(B) such person fully cooperated with any Government investigation of such violation; and

(C) at the time such person furnished the United States with the information about the violation, no criminal prosecution, civil action, or administrative action had commenced under this title with respect to such violation, and the person did not have actual knowledge of the existence of an investigation into such violation, the court may assess not less than 2 times the amount of damages which the Government sustains because of the act of that person.

(3) COSTS OF CIVIL ACTIONS.—

A person violating this subsection shall also be liable to the United States Government for the costs of a civil action brought to recover any such penalty or damages.

(b) DEFINITIONS —For purposes of this section

(1) the terms “knowing” and “knowingly”—

(A) mean that a person, with respect to information—

(i) has actual knowledge of the information;

(ii) acts in deliberate ignorance of the truth or falsity of theinformation; or

(iii) acts in reckless disregard of the truth or falsity of the information; and

(B) require no proof of specific intent to defraud;

(2) the term “claim” —

(A) means any request or demand, whether under a contract or otherwise, for money or property and whether or not the United States has title to the money or property, that—

(i) is presented to an officer, employee, or agent of the United States; or

(ii) is made to a contractor, grantee, or other recipient, if the money or property is to be spent or used on the Government’s behalf or to advance a Government program or interest, and if the United States Government —

(I) provides or has provided any portion of the money or property requested or demanded; or

(II) will reimburse such contractor, grantee, or other recipient for any portion of the money or property which is requested or demanded; and

(B) does not include requests or demands for money or property that the Government has paid to an individual as compensation for Federal employment or as an income subsidy with no restrictions on that individual’s use of the money or property;

(3) the term “obligation” means an established duty, whether or not fixed, arising from an express or implied contractual, grantor-grantee, or licensor-licensee relationship, from a fee-based or similar relationship, from statute or regulation, or from the retention of any overpayment; and

(4) the term “material” means having a natural tendency to influence, or be capable of influencing, the payment or receipt of money or property.

(c) EXEMPTION FROM DISCLOSURE Any information furnished pursuant to subsection (a)(2) shall be exempt from disclosure under section 552 of title 5.

(d) EXCLUSION This section does not apply to claims, records, or statements made under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.

§ 3730. Civil Actions for False Claims

(a) RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL The Attorney General diligently shall investigate a violation under section 3729. If the Attorney General finds that a person has violated or is violating section 3729, the Attorney General may bring a civil action under this section against the person.

(b) ACTIONS BY PRIVATE PERSONS

(1) A person may bring a civil action for a violation of section 3729 for the person and for the United States Government. The action shall be brought in the name of the Government. The action may be dismissed only if the court and the Attorney General give written consent to the dismissal and their reasons for consenting.

(2) A copy of the complaint and written disclosure of substantially all material evidence and information the person possesses shall be served on the Government pursuant to Rule 4(d)(4) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The complaint shall be filed in camera, shall remain under seal for at least 60 days, and shall not be served on the defendant until the court so orders. The Government may elect to intervene and proceed with the action within 60 days after it receives both the complaint and the material evidence and information.

(3) The Government may, for good cause shown, move the court for extensions of the time during which the complaint remains under seal under paragraph (2). Any such motions may be supported by affidavits or other submissions in camera. The defendant shall not be required to respond to any complaint filed under this section until 20 days after the complaint is unsealed and served upon the defendant pursuant to Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

(4) Before the expiration of the 60-day period or any extensions obtained under paragraph (3), the Government shall—

(A) proceed with the action, in which case the action shall be conducted by the Government; or

(B) notify the court that it declines to take over the action, in which case the person bringing the action shall have the right to conduct the action.

(5) When a person brings an action under this subsection, no person other than the Government may intervene or bring a related action based on the facts underlying the pending action.

(c) RIGHTS OF THE PARTIES TO QUI TAM ACTIONS

(1) If the Government proceeds with the action, it shall have the primary responsibility for prosecuting the action, and shall not be bound by an act of the person bringing the action. Such person shall have the right to continue as a party to the action, subject to the limitations set forth in paragraph (2).

(2)

(A) The Government may dismiss the action notwithstanding the objections of the person initiating the action if the person has been notified by the Government of the filing of the motion and the court has provided the person with an opportunity for a hearing on the motion.

(B) The Government may settle the action with the defendant notwithstanding the objections of the person initiating the action if the court determines, after a hearing, that the proposed settlement is fair, adequate, and reasonable under all the circumstances. Upon a showing of good cause, such hearing may be held in camera.

(C) Upon a showing by the Government that unrestricted participation during the course of the litigation by the person initiating the action would interfere with or unduly delay the Government’s prosecution of the case, or would be repetitious, irrelevant, or for purposes of harassment, the court may, in its discretion, impose limitations on the person’s participation, such as —

(i) limiting the number of witnesses the person may call;

(ii) limiting the length of the testimony of such witnesses;

(iii) limiting the person’s cross-examination of witnesses; or

(iv) otherwise limiting the participation by the person in the litigation.

(D) Upon a showing by the defendant that unrestricted participation during the course of the litigation by the person initiating the action would be for purposes of harassment or would cause the defendant undue burden or unnecessary expense, the court may limit the participation by the person in the litigation.

(3) If the Government elects not to proceed with the action, the person who initiated the action shall have the right to conduct the action. If the Government so requests, it shall be served with copies of all pleadings filed in the action and shall be supplied with copies of all deposition transcripts (at the Government’s expense). When a person proceeds with the action, the court, without limiting the status and rights of the person initiating the action, may nevertheless permit the Government to intervene at a later date upon a showing of good cause.

(4) Whether or not the Government proceeds with the action, upon a showing by the Government that certain actions of discovery by the person initiating the action would interfere with the Government’s investigation or prosecution of a criminal or civil matter arising out of the same facts, the court may stay such discovery for a period of not more than 60 days. Such a showing shall be conducted in camera. The court may extend the 60-day period upon a further showing in camera that the Government has pursued the criminal or civil investigation or proceedings with reasonable diligence and any proposed discovery in the civil action will interfere with the ongoing criminal or civil investigation or proceedings.

(5) Notwithstanding subsection (b), the Government may elect to pursue its claim through any alternate remedy available to the Government, including any administrative proceeding to determine a civil money penalty. If any such alternate remedy is pursued in another proceeding, the person initiating the action shall have the same rights in such proceeding as such person would have had if the action had continued under this section. Any finding of fact or conclusion of law made in such other proceeding that has become final shall be conclusive on all parties to an action under this section. For purposes of the preceding sentence, a finding or conclusion is final if it has been finally determined on appeal to the appropriate court of the United States, if all time for filing such an appeal with respect to the finding or conclusion has expired, or if the finding or conclusion is not subject to judicial review.

(d) AWARD TO QUI TAM PLAINTIFF

(1) If the Government proceeds with an action brought by a person under subsection (b), such person shall, subject to the second sentence of this paragraph, receive at least 15 percent but not more than 25 percent of the proceeds of the action or settlement of the claim, depending upon the extent to which the person substantially contributed to the prosecution of the action. Where the action is one which the court finds to be based primarily on disclosures of specific information (other than information provided by the person bringing the action) relating to allegations or transactions in a criminal, civil, or administrative hearing, in a congressional, administrative, or Government [General] Accounting Office report, hearing, audit, or investigation, or from the news media, the court may award such sums as it considers appropriate, but in no case more than 10 percent of the proceeds, taking into account the significance of the information and the role of the person bringing the action in advancing the case to litigation. Any payment to a person under the first or second sentence of this paragraph shall be made from the proceeds. Any such person shall also receive an amount for reasonable expenses which the court finds to have been necessarily incurred, plus reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs. All such expenses, fees, and costs shall be awarded against the defendant.

(2) If the Government does not proceed with an action under this section, the person bringing the action or settling the claim shall receive an amount which the court decides is reasonable for collecting the civil penalty and damages. The amount shall be not less than 25 percent and not more than 30 percent of the proceeds of the action or settlement and shall be paid out of such proceeds. Such person shall also receive an amount for reasonable expenses which the court finds to have been necessarily incurred, plus reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs. All such expenses, fees, and costs shall be awarded against the defendant.

(3) Whether or not the Government proceeds with the action, if the court finds that the action was brought by a person who planned and initiated the violation of section 3729 upon which the action was brought, then the court may, to the extent the court considers appropriate, reduce the share of the proceeds of the action which the person would otherwise receive under paragraph (1) or (2) of this subsection, taking into account the role of that person in advancing the case to litigation and any relevant circumstances pertaining to the violation. If the person bringing the action is convicted of criminal conduct arising from his or her role in the violation of section 3729, that person shall be dismissed from the civil action and shall not receive any share of the proceeds of the action. Such dismissal shall not prejudice the right of the United States to continue the action, represented by the Department of Justice.

(4) If the Government does not proceed with the action and the person bringing the action conducts the action, the court may award to the defendant its reasonable attorneys’ fees and expenses if the defendant prevails in the action and the court finds that the claim of the person bringing the action was clearly frivolous, clearly vexatious, or brought primarily for purposes of harassment.

(e) CERTAIN ACTIONS BARRED

(1) No court shall have jurisdiction over an action brought by a former or present member of the armed forces under subsection (b) of this section against a member of the armed forces arising out of such person’s service in the armed forces.

(2)

(A) No court shall have jurisdiction over an action brought under subsection (b) against a Member of Congress, a member of the judiciary, or a senior executive branch official if the action is based on evidence or information known to the Government when the action was brought.

(B) For purposes of this paragraph, “senior executive branch official” means any officer or employee listed in paragraphs (1) through (8) of section 101(f) of the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App.).

(3) In no event may a person bring an action under subsection (b) which is based upon allegations or transactions which are the subject of a civil suit or an administrative civil money penalty proceeding in which the Government is already a party.

(4)

(A) No court shall have jurisdiction over an action under this section based upon the public disclosure of allegations or transactions in a criminal, civil, or administrative hearing, in a congressional, administrative, or Government [General] Accounting Office report, hearing, audit, or investigation, or from the news media, unless the action is brought by the Attorney General or the person bringing the action is an original source of the information.

(B) For purposes of this paragraph, “original source” means an individual who has direct and independent knowledge of the information on which the allegations are based and has voluntarily provided the information to the Government before filing an action under this section which is based on the information.

(f) GOVERNMENT NOT LIABLE FOR CERTAIN EXPENSES The Government is not liable for expenses which a person incurs in bringing an action under this section.

(g) FEES AND EXPENSES TO PREVAILING DEFENDANT In civil actions brought under this section by the United States, the provisions of section 2412(d) of title 28 shall apply.

(h) RELIEF FROM RETALIATORY ACTIONS

(1) IN GENERAL.—Any employee, contractor, or agent shall be entitled to all relief necessary to make that employee, contractor, or agent whole, if that employee, contractor, or agent is discharged, demoted, suspended, threatened, harassed, or in any other manner discriminated against in the terms and conditions of employment because of lawful acts done by the employee, contractor, or agent on behalf of the employee, contractor, or agent or associated others in furtherance of other efforts to stop 1 or more violations of this subchapter.

(2) RELIEF.—Relief under paragraph (1) shall include reinstatement with the same seniority status that employee, contractor, or agent would have had but for the discrimination, 2 times the amount of back pay, interest on the back pay, and compensation for any special damages sustained as a result of the discrimination, including litigation costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees. An action under this subsection may be brought in the appropriate district court of the United States for the relief provided in this subsection.

---

 TARP Fraud Lawsuits, Bail Out Fraud Lawsuits, and Qui Tam Lawsuits

The Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) is a $700 Billion Bail Out of the troubled United States Banking and Credit System.  It was designed to unfreeze the credit market and enable the government to purchase residential and commercial mortgage assets, including whole loans and securities.  Unfortunately, after it was announced numerous Corporate interests began scheming on how to get as much of the Bail Out money as possible and use the money not for its intended purpose, but to enrich the corporations, shareholders, and CEOs that were able to get a portion of the money.

If you are aware of a corporation, CEO, or individual that has fraudulently obtained Bail Out money or intentionally used this money contrary to its intended purpose, there may be a viable Qui Tam Claim that would allow you not only to recoup government money for U.S. taxpayers, but also collect a portion of that money for yourself.

Federal False Claim Act Whistleblower Lawyers and Federal False Claims Act Fraud Lawsuits (Qui Tam Lawyers & Relator Claims)

Through Federal False Claims Act Whistleblower Lawsuits, Qui Tam Lawsuits, and other Government Fraud Lawsuits, hundreds of billions of dollars have been recovered from fraudulent government contractors that have stolen large amounts of money from the government and taxpayers.

It is extremely important that Whistleblowers continue to expose fraudulent billing practices and unnecessary treatments that cost billions of dollars.   If you are aware of a large government contractor that is defrauding the United States Government out of millions or billions of dollars, contact Texas Federal False Claims Act Whistleblower Lawyer Jason Coomer.  As a Federal False Claims Act Whistle Blower Lawyer, he works with other powerful qui tam lawyers that handle large Government Fraud cases.  He works with San Antonio Qui Tam Lawyers, Houston Medicare Fraud Whistleblower Lawyers, California Healthcare Fraud Lawyers, Dallas Defense Contractor Fraud Lawyers, and other Medicare Fraud Whistleblower Lawyers as well as with Qui Tam Federal False Claim Act Whistleblower Lawyers throughout the United States and the World to blow the whistle on fraud that hurts the United States and taxpayers. 

If you are aware of Medicare Fraud, Defense Contractor Fraud, Stimulus Fraud, Government Contractor Fraud, or other government fraud and are the original source with special knowledge of fraud and want to be a whistleblower and an American Hero, please feel free to contact Federal False Claims Act Whistleblower Fraud Lawyer Jason Coomer via e-mail message or our submission form about a potential False Claim regarding a Health Care Fraud lawsuit, Medicare and Medicaid Fraud Lawsuit, Defense Contract Fraud Lawsuit, or other Government Fraud Lawsuits.