Watch Now

Whistleblower suit alleges Navistar forged military vehicle invoices

Federal judge unseals 2013 complaint seeking treble $1.28 billion in damages

Allegedly forged invoices for the Navistar Defense mine-resistant, ambush-protected (MRAP) are at the center of a lawsuit.

A federal judge unsealed a 6-year-old whistleblower suit against Navistar Defense LLC and Navistar International Corp. (NYSE: NAV) that seeks at least $1.28 billion in damages over allegedly forged invoices for military vehicles and components.

According to the civil suit unsealed Dec. 3, Navistar violated the False Claims Act by forging invoices, catalog prices and other data during negotiations of a multibillion-dollar contract for mine-resistant, ambush-protected (MRAP) vehicles and related components from 2006 to 2013.

In August 2017, the U.S. Department of Justice accused Navistar Defense of making false and misleading statements during price negotiations and a resulting audit. The Justice Department claimed Navistar Defense overcharged by $88 million for independent suspension systems in 2009 and 2010. It sought treble damages and penalties totaling $264 million.

Navistar Defense has been in discussions with the Department of Defense Inspector General and Justice Department since subpoenas were first issued in the third quarter of 2016. The government is continuing to question Navistar employees, according to Navistar’s third-quarter 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

“We believe our pricing was fair, reasonable and competitive,” Navistar spokeswoman Lyndi McMillan said. “The company intends to defend itself as necessary and appropriate.”

Navistar, which sold 70% of Navistar Defense to Cerberus Capital Management in December 2018, has been in mediation with the government over the allegations since February 2019.

The case, U.S. ex. Rel Duquoin Burgess v. Navistar, was filed in 2013 by Duquoin Burgess, a former contract director at Navistar. An employee with evidence of fraud against federal programs or contracts can sue the wrongdoer on behalf of the U.S. government. In so-called qui tam actions, the government can intervene and join the action.

“We are disappointed the government has chosen to intervene in this matter,” McMillan said.

According to the complaint, the government overpaid approximately $1.125 billion for approximately 9,000 MRAP vehicles with the Navistar 7400 chassis; $36.4 million for 2,697 MRAP vehicles with a MaxxForce D9.316 engine and $118.7 million for 3,898 independent suspension kits.

The suit claims fabricated and fraudulent representations underlie both the initial contract award and subsequent placement of delivery orders from 2007 to 2012. Navistar allegedly used forgeries to skip the requirement that it present real evidence of past sales, according to the complaint. Navistar Defense took advantage of the military’s need for MRAP vehicles in Afghanistan, according to the suit, which seeks treble damages, the maximum allowable payment to Burgess under whistleblower rules and a jury trial.

“There is nothing more important than the safety of those serving our country, and we take tremendous pride in the vehicles we manufacture,” Navistar’s McMillan said. “We value our long-standing partnership with the military and are proud to provide safe, reliable military vehicles of superior quality.”

December 4 stock price of Navistar International Corp. as shown FreightWaves’ SONAR.


  1. Dave Smith

    I worked for Navistar a few years back…senior mgt team was as crooked as anything I’d ever seen…hoping they end up getting smacked down good!

  2. Sean

    I work for Navistar and have seen exactly how they cover things up. They have creative math and it’s always to the company’s benefit. On investors side they showed profits , on the employee profit sharing thwy showed a loss to keep from paying profit sharing. The CEO and top executives always got there bonous. This article does not surprise me . Navistar has had many issues because they believe the law does not pertain to them. Or certain people act on there own. It was reported that prior CEO said produce engines and don’t worry if they don’t meet EPA regulations for clean emissions I have the government in my back pocket. I believe the present CEO (Troy Clarke) is a good man and is trying very hard to make Navistar a leader in the truck , bus , and new electric innovation. There many good employees at Navistar that work hard and have good jobs and as a mutual benefit work hard every day. The UAW has backed all the employees and together with Navistar they have turned the company around. Several legal issues they need to make right and move on and learn from past mistakes. Now you have the warranty lawsuit . Navistar had a plant manager go to jail for embezzling money. There workers comp department has put extreme hardship on alot of people forcing them out of work and actually discriminated against disabled workers. I believe the government should do a in depth investigation. Navistar should be held accountable if they violated the law and inflated pricing costing tax payers undue hardship. Maybe they are so big the law doesn’t apply to them. They do build a nice product . It seems Greed gets the best of them. Who knows maybe if there investigated they will be on American Greed.

    1. Mario Pawlowski / iTrucker

      Very interesting story Sean. I think they on the way to be more famous if ‘American Greed” does the documentary about them ;-).

Comments are closed.

Alan Adler

Alan Adler is an award-winning journalist who worked for The Associated Press and the Detroit Free Press. He also spent two decades in domestic and international media relations and executive communications with General Motors.