For instance, courts have dismissed cases when the relator has failed to file under seal or failed to postpone service on the defendant until after the seal is lifted, even when the service was not deliberate, but rather occurred due to the negligence of the relator. Voluntary disclosure may limit a contractor's liability in several ways. In other words, the relator must have personal knowledge of the false claim which was not discussed with others and is independent of the public disclosure. Thus, such disclosure will likely preclude a relator from bringing a false claims action. Second, voluntary disclosure may result in a reduction of the damages for which a defendant may be liable.
Voluntary disclosure does present some risks to the contractor.
Thus, a volunteer may not benefit from disclosure, yet might likely disclose to the government damaging evidence and possibly waive certain defenses. Additionally, voluntary disclosure will require conducting an internal investigation. However, any individual considering an internal investigation should be aware of some of the associated potential pitfalls. If a company becomes aware of questionable conduct, it will want to put into place compliance procedures to avoid future recurrences. Once the company is aware of information which the government or relator may later claim forms the basis for a false claim action, it can determine what strategy to employ and whether and when voluntary disclosure should be made.