Construction project professionals routinely send e-mails with “signatures,” which typically include the sender’s typewritten name, title, contact information, and/or company logo. But, this sort of e-mail “signature” is not enough to certify a claim to the Government.
A recent decision of the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals dismissed an appeal by finding the claimant’s typical e-mail signature was not enough to properly certify a claim. The Board stated proper signatures could have been handwritten or digital (as applied in a pdf).
On a project for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers at Manas International Airport, Kyrgyzstan, the Contractor submitted a claim by attaching it to an e-mail. The Contractor properly included all the words certifying the claim in the body of the transmittal e-mail. The “Director” for the Contractor “signed” the e-mail with his typewritten name, title, and contact information (a typical e-mail “signature” block).
Under FAR § 2.101, a proper signature is “a discrete, verifiable symbol of an individual.” Under this Board decision, there are two proper signatures:
- A handwritten signature or
- Digital signature (as in a pdf).
But, other types of proper signatures could include:
- Fingerprint or
- Photograph of your face (think about unlocking an iPhoneX).
These other types were not addressed by this Board decision, but could be considered “discrete, verifiable symbol(s) of an individual.” Nevertheless, I would stick with the tried and true handwritten signature.
Interestingly, the Board did not discuss how a password necessary to digitally sign a pdf compares to the password access necessary to send an e-mail. If the two are comparably secure, then a typewritten e-mail signature block should be as effective as digitally signing a pdf.
Acceptance and Intervening Cause Avoided Construction Warranty Claim
Like cars, computers, and appliances, construction projects include warranties too. Similarly, construction project warranties are limited to causes within the contractor’s control […]
Insurance Company Had No Duty to Defend Under Eight Corners Rule
To decide if an insurer has a duty to defend, a Virginia State or Federal Court may only look at the allegations in the complaint and the insurance policy to determine if a judgment against the insured will be covered by the policy.
Owner SOL When Mandatory Mediation Didn’t Toll Statute of Limitations
Contract interpretation strives to find the meaning of all parts together.
Government Must Review Claims in Good Faith, Not “Conjure Up” a “Baseless Retaliation”
A contracting officer’s review of certified claims submitted in good faith is not intended to be a negotiating game where the agency may deny meritorious claims to gain leverage over the contractor.
Termination for Convenience was OK to Get a Lower Price
When Massachusetts’ highest State court rejected Federal law on termination for convenience (T4C) a public entity’s “sole discretion . . . for […]
Pirates (Parties) Should Arbitrate Arbitrability
Yes, the word “pirates” is an anagram for “parties.” Participants in a lawsuit, arbitration, or mediation are collectively referred to as parties. Are they pirates too?
Very Bad Behavior Without Bad Faith is Not a Breach of Contract
Despite “abhorrent” behavior by the Army Corps of Engineers, a majority of the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals held there was […]
Government Construction Contracts Require Bonds, Even When Contract Doesn’t Say So
Yesterday (Nov. 5, 2018), the Fed. Cir. Ct. of Appeals again endorsed the Christian doctrine, which can make unstated requirements part of a government contract.
Government’s Negligent Estimate a Trick?
The Government’s negligent estimate failed to provide the “most current information available.”
