Recent Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals Decision Reiterates the Signature Requirement for Certified Claims

November 4, 2017

Recent Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (ASBCA) decision reiterates the signature requirement for certified claims––a typewritten signature in the signature block of the claim is insufficient.  The ASBCA reasoned:

 

"Here we have no signature, no discrete, verifiable symbol that can be authenticated, only a typewritten signature block, similar to the circumstances in the Tokyo Company appeal. See also Emerald Town Construction Group, ASBCA No. 60841, 2017 ASBCA Lexis 129; ABS Development Corp., ASBCA No. 60022 et al., 16-1 BCA 36,564; Teknocraft Inc., ASBCA No. 55438, 08-1 BCA 33,846. "Signature or signed" is defined in FAR 2.101 to mean "the discrete, verifiable symbol of an individual which, when affixed to a writing with the knowledge and consent of the individual, indicates a present intent to authenticate the writing." A signature need not be handwritten only, but can include electronic symbols associated with electronic or digital signatures. Here we have nothing corresponding to a signature as required, and only have the typewritten signature block that we found insufficient in Tokyo Company, Emerald Town, ABS and other appeals." 

 

Takeaway

 

Contractors should take note and make sure that your certified claims are properly signed.

 

A copy of the decision can be found HERE.

Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Please reload

Contact Matross Edwards
Search By Tags
Connect
  • Matross Edwards
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
  • Podcast
  • Spotify
  • TuneIn

Copyright © 2020 Joshua B. Duvall. All rights reserved.

GovConJudicata™ #govconjudicata

CyberJudicata™ #cyberjudicata

LegalJudicata™ #legaljudicata