The contractor performed work that wasn’t in the contract, and that the agency didn’t request. The contractor sought recovery under an unjust enrichment theory. The ASBCA rejected the claim. A contractor can’t just force a betterment on the agency.
Compendium International, Inc. v. Department of Justice, CBCA 6743
- Out-of-Scope Work – While performing, the contractor demolished and removed a restroom. The agency had not exercised an option for removal of the restroom, and the agency had not approved the demolition. Moreover, the contractor never sought a change order or additional money for the work before accepting final payment. The contractor built a new restroom in a different location. The agency thought the contractor built the new restroom at no cost to the government.
- The Claim – The contractor submitted a claim for costs associated with the restroom. The agency denied the claim. The contractor appealed to CBCA, alleging various theories, for defective specifications, differing site condition, and agency mismanagement.
- Claims Barred by Payment – The board noted fundamental problem with the claim: the contractor had submitted the claim after accepting final payment. By accepting final payment, the contractor had released the government from liability.
- Quantum Meruit – The contractor argued the while the it performed out-of-scope work, it should still be reimbursed under an unjust enrichment theory. The board reasoned that a contractor will not be paid for betterment in excess of contract terms.
The contractor is represented by Mark D. Johnson of Lanak & Hanna, P.C. The government is represented by Ashley Akers, Jimmy S. McBirney, and Mark E. Mandel of the Department of Justice.
–Case summary by Craig LaChance, Senior Editor
