Company XYZ, a mason contractor, received a government contract amounting to $400,00.00 from Mercy City's Department of General Services for the purpose of "pointing" the joints of the stone exterior of the City's ornate municipal building. Before issuing the contract, XYZ was fully vetted by the police as to a criminal background check and the City's Treasurer ran a financial background check. The application of the cement monitored by a representative of the City's Department of Public Works and a contract officer of General Services. The cement that was applied to the building joints by XYZ was tested at the construction site by an independent lab. The lab followed standards specified under the contract. After the construction ended, and a complete inspection by the government, the project was approved by the contract officer as to meeting the terms and conditions of the contract and subsequently, XYZ was paid. A few months after final payment, a violent storm hit Mercy. The newly "pointed" stone was totally washed away due allegedly to the poor quality of the cement. As contracting officer, what action, if any, would you consider to assure the public's interest was protected? Do not rule out the construction of the contract.

https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=umNaDwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PT10&dq=Cooper,+P.J.+(2003).+Governing+by+Contract:+Challenges+and+Opportunities+for+Public+Manager.+CRC.&ots=dEuUu_vCOt&sig=ceywPsjIdh1NQ5C7fF1mt0p5tZ0#v=onepage&q&f=false