Tweet
divdiv class=story-body readability=26 span class=story-date#13; span class=date19 November 2013/span#13; span class=time-textLast updated at /spanspan class=time06:31 ET/span#13; #13; /span#13; #13; #13; #13; #13; #13; #13; #13; #13; p class=introduction id=story_continues_1Private security firm G4S has agreed to pay back £23.3m after admitting the way it billed the UK government for tagging offenders was not appropriate./p#13; pA National Audit Office review also revealed a G4S whistle-blower had made allegations about company practices./p#13; pIt comes after an audit suggested the firm had been charging for tagging criminals who were either dead, in jail or never tagged in the first place./p#13; pThe Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has begun an investigation into the matter./p#13; pG4S has said it will co-operate fully with the probe./p#13; pIn July, the Ministry of Justice (MoJ revealed that G4S and a second security company, Serco, had overcharged the government by tens of millions of pounds on their electronic tagging contracts. /p#13; pThe audit by accountancy firm PricewaterhouseCoopers - which had been launched in May - alleged the charging discrepancies had started at least as far back as the start of the current contracts, in 2005, but could have dated back to the previous contracts in 1999./p#13; pAccording to the NAO's review, allegations about practices at the company were made in March this year by a G4S whistle-blower who had been working at a call centre operating the firm's tagging contract./p#13; pThe NAO said: G4S has stated to us that in its view, the MoJ should have been aware of the way in which it was billing, and that it provided written explanations in 2009 that reflected its interpretation of the contract at the time./p#13; pG4S also stated, however, that 'irrespective of the contractual position, the current management of G4S believes that the interpretation applied to historical billing practices was not appropriate in respect of periods when no electronic monitoring was taking place'./p#13; pThe NAO said the firm had written to the MoJ stating it intended to offer credit notes totalling £23.3m for the issues that had been identified to date./p#13; pThe SFO announced its investigation into both companies earlier this month. Serco has also said it was co-operating fully./p#13; pOn Serco, the NAO said: Serco has stated to us that it considers it charged in line with its genuine interpretation of the contract and that it was open about this to the Ministry [of Justice] throughout. Serco has stated publicly that it will refund any agreed overcharges. /p#13; /div/divbrbrcentera href=http://www.wizardrss.comPowered By WizardRSS.com/a | a href=http://www.wizardrss.comFull Text RSS Feed/a | a href=http://www.amazon.com/RFID-Blocking-Cards-Identity-Protector/dp/B00CJHZLEWRFID/a | a href=http://www.wpzonbuilder.comAmazon Affiliate/a/center