The News Is Not Getting Any Better For G4S

Mr_Fingerz

LE
Book Reviewer
#1
T

Tremaine

Guest
#2
Not a lot of reporting on this yet, it was on the radio today and the Guardian has the story online. Chris Grayling "told MPs he has asked the Serious Fraud Office to investigate G4S" after offering them the chance of a voluntary forensic investigation, which "G4S refused on Wednesday. G4S also refused to withdraw their bid for the next generation of tagging contracts worth £3bn (while SERCO stuck their hands up and withdrew)". G4S Investigation Solutions and their Compliance services, could do with the investigative work, but haven't been asked. Ironic isn't it, security, investigators and compliance services under investigation.

The sums involved with this alleged overcharging are reported to be significant. Best wait til after the SFO have finished, while delaying safe bets on guilt and hoping our illustrious Guv's cozy relationships with (yet more) private crooks won't get in the way.
 
#3
What astounds me is does nobody within the appropriate Government Dept check / vet and periodically randomly audit invoices received from such companies for such contracts before payments are authorised .
 
#4
I for one am a stanch supporter of Group 4 as the more hours it's guards spend plodding aimlessly around supermarkets, the less time they get to spend 419'ing the rest of us.
 

Wordsmith

LE
Book Reviewer
#5
What astounds me is does nobody within the appropriate Government Dept check / vet and periodically randomly audit invoices received from such companies for such contracts before payments are authorised .
It would appear they did - they just did the square root of fcuk all about it.

G4S and Serco: Taxpayers overcharged by tens of millions over electronic tagging - Telegraph

It also emerged civil servants first became aware of some of the problems in 2008 but failed to take appropriate action - and Mr Grayling said some may now face disciplinary action.
Not that the problem was difficult to spot in the first place.

Ministry of Justice sources said although they typically had 15,000 offenders on a tag at any one time G4S and Serco had been charging them for 18,000 - meaning one in six was spurious.
Good odds this sort of overcharging is rife in the public sector. If the checks aren't done properly, companies hungry for profit will take the p*ss.

Wordsmith
 
#6
just been on the 6 oclock news that this could go back as afar as 1999. claiming for tagging the dead as well how far down can they go
 
#8
G4S declined the offer to have their books looked at? I bet they ******* did!
 
#9
It would appear they did - they just did the square root of fcuk all about it.

G4S and Serco: Taxpayers overcharged by tens of millions over electronic tagging - Telegraph



Not that the problem was difficult to spot in the first place.



Good odds this sort of overcharging is rife in the public sector. If the checks aren't done properly, companies hungry for profit will take the p*ss.

Wordsmith
Well hopefully not only should G4S be investigated but also the appropriate Govt Departments for dereliction of duty or misuse of public funds .... or something like that ... however in the real world they will not ... stand by for " Lessons will be learned ... procedures will be improved ... blaa di blaa " .
 

Mr_Fingerz

LE
Book Reviewer
#11
WTF has that got to do with this thread?
 
#12
G4S declined the offer to have their books looked at? I bet they ******* did!
What the hell? Every contract I have ever signed as an outside contractor includes wording to the effect that the client has the absolute right to examine my books - relevant to them - at any time, without warning.
 

seaweed

LE
Book Reviewer
#14
Calm down, Bouncy, I'm sure Kent Police are looking into it.
 
#16
Is this adequate? If you commit benefit fraud you risk imprisonment or at least community service,(taking monies knowingly of the Govt) so why not those running G4S......just asking like!
 
#18
What astounds me is does nobody within the appropriate Government Dept check / vet and periodically randomly audit invoices received from such companies for such contracts before payments are authorised .

Well, no actually. Government contracts are awarded on the basis of kickbacks from the bidders, the understanding being that the winner gets to defraud the taxpayer as he or she sees fit.
 
#19
It doesn't matter what country you live in, the theft from the tax payer just goes on & on.

The only way to stop this is to start handing out LARGE prison sentences.
 
#20
A slightly different angle would be that this is classic public sector bureaucracy incompetence. Let an overly complex contract contract with an messy payment mechanism that attempts to track far too many variables and you will get erros. A small error in data input could feed through into a massive error in billing that is neither deliberate nor fraudulent.

When an invoice is signed off for payment, the person signing is certifying that the goods or services have been delivered. If the system which uses those services cannot assure the responsible signatory then he/she should not sign. I suspect civil servants with means of checking the service delivery have been signing off invoices without proper checks, something that is rife across public sector contracting. This sounds as if the internal accounting system in the justice and home office is not able to keep track of its responsibilities, something that should have been in place before the contract with G4S was let.

We don't know the terms of the contract. Maybe it was the responsibility of public servants to inform the suppliers about the people who had died, left the country or been returned to prison. The companies may have been 'crying out' for accurate figures in order to bill correctly; I have yet to see any public sector contract on which the client meets their terms of contract......
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top