Skip to main content

B-166801, JUL. 21, 1970

B-166801 Jul 21, 1970
Jump To:
Skip to Highlights

Highlights

UPON CHANGE OF STATION PURCHASED A RESIDENCE FOR WHICH HE WAS CHARGED AN ATTORNEY'S FEE FOR SERVICE INCIDENT TO THE REAL ESTATE TRANSACTION MAY NOT BE REIMBURSED FOR THE FEE SINCE NOTHING IN THE ATTORNEY'S STATEMENT INDICATES OPINION CONCERNED THE STATUS OF THE TITLE OF THE PROPERTY AND THEREFORE DOES NOT MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF SEC. 4.2C OF BUREAU OF THE BUDGET CIRCULAR NO. YOU ENCLOSED COPIES OF PAPERS WHICH YOU STATE WERE INVOLVED IN A SIMILAR CLAIM DISALLOWED BUT SUBSEQUENTLY PAID. YOU REFERRED TO THE LAST SENTENCE IN OUR DISALLOWANCE READING "THERE IS NO RECORD THAT A TITLE OPINION WAS MADE OR THAT A CHARGE WAS MADE FOR SUCH SERVICE. GIVE YOU SUCH A LEGAL OPINION CONCERNING THE STATUS OF TITLE WHICH YOU SAY WAS NECESSARY FOR THE PURCHASE OF THE RESIDENCE.

View Decision

B-166801, JUL. 21, 1970

CIVIL PAY -- REIMBURSEMENT -- ATTORNEY-FEE FOR REAL ESTATE TRANSACTIONS DECISION TO AN EMPLOYEE SUSTAINING THE DISALLOWANCE OF CLAIM FOR AN ATTORNEY'S FEE PAID INCIDENT TO THE PURCHASE OF A RESIDENCE UPON PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION FROM ST. LOUIS, MO., TO CHICAGO, ILL. EMPLOYEE WHO, UPON CHANGE OF STATION PURCHASED A RESIDENCE FOR WHICH HE WAS CHARGED AN ATTORNEY'S FEE FOR SERVICE INCIDENT TO THE REAL ESTATE TRANSACTION MAY NOT BE REIMBURSED FOR THE FEE SINCE NOTHING IN THE ATTORNEY'S STATEMENT INDICATES OPINION CONCERNED THE STATUS OF THE TITLE OF THE PROPERTY AND THEREFORE DOES NOT MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF SEC. 4.2C OF BUREAU OF THE BUDGET CIRCULAR NO. A-56.

TO MR. MICHAEL B. MCNAMEE:

YOUR LETTER OF MAY 20, 1970, ASKS THAT WE RECONSIDER OUR DISALLOWANCE DATED APRIL 20, 1970, OF YOUR CLAIM FOR AN ATTORNEY'S FEE OF $95 IN CONNECTION WITH THE PURCHASE OF A RESIDENCE UPON PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION FROM ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI, TO CHICAGO, ILLINOIS. YOU ENCLOSED COPIES OF PAPERS WHICH YOU STATE WERE INVOLVED IN A SIMILAR CLAIM DISALLOWED BUT SUBSEQUENTLY PAID.

YOU REFERRED TO THE LAST SENTENCE IN OUR DISALLOWANCE READING "THERE IS NO RECORD THAT A TITLE OPINION WAS MADE OR THAT A CHARGE WAS MADE FOR SUCH SERVICE," AND POINT OUT THAT YOUR ATTORNEY, MR. EUGENE J. KORST, DID, IN FACT, GIVE YOU SUCH A LEGAL OPINION CONCERNING THE STATUS OF TITLE WHICH YOU SAY WAS NECESSARY FOR THE PURCHASE OF THE RESIDENCE. FURTHER YOU QUOTE THE TERMS "TITLE" AND "OPINION" AND THEIR MEANINGS FROM WEBSTER'S DICTIONARY IN SUBSTANTIATION OF YOUR ARGUMENT FOR THE ALLOWANCE OF YOUR CLAIM.

IN THE DISALLOWANCE OF YOUR CLAIM WE CONSIDERED THE STATEMENT YOU FURNISHED FROM YOUR ATTORNEY. THAT STATEMENT DATED AUGUST 14, 1969, READS AS FOLLOWS:

"SERVICES RENDERED IN FULL RE PURCHASE OF 1405 MCKENZIE AVENUE, LOCKPORT, ILLINOIS, INCLUDING TELEPHONE CONFERENCES WITH CLIENT, WITH MR. VOGEL OF PERCY WILSON, WITH MR. TAUER OF RIDGELAND SAVINGS, MR. BENSON, MR. KRIZ; REVIEW OF REAL ESTATE SALE CONTRACT, REVIEW OF MORTGAGE PAPERS AND OBTAINING EXECUTION THEREOF; REVIEW OF TITLE REPORT AND OTHER DOCUMENTS; CORRESPONDENCE, TELEPHONE, ETC. $95.00." BASED THEREON WE CONCLUDED THAT THE ITEMS REFERRED TO WERE ADVISORY IN NATURE AND DID NOT MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 4.2C, BUREAU OF THE BUDGET CIRCULAR NO. A-56, REVISED OCTOBER 12, 1966, APPLICABLE HERE. SEE B 165280, DECEMBER 31, 1969, COPY ENCLOSED. SECTION 4.2C READS AS FOLLOWS:

"C. LEGAL AND RELATED COSTS. TO THE EXTENT SUCH COSTS HAVE NOT BEEN INCLUDED IN BROKERS' OR SIMILAR SERVICES FOR WHICH REIMBURSEMENT IS CLAIMED UNDER OTHER CATEGORIES, CUSTOMARY COSTS OF SEARCHING TITLE, PREPARING CONVEYANCES AND OTHER INSTRUMENTS, AND PREPARING CONTRACTS, RELATED NOTARY FEES, RECORDING FEES, MAKING SURVEYS, PREPARING DRAWINGS OR PLATS WHEN REQUIRED FOR LEGAL OR FINANCING PURPOSES, AND SIMILAR EXPENSES, MAY BE REIMBURSED EITHER WITH RESPECT TO SALE OF THE RESIDENCE AT THE OLD OFFICIAL STATION OR PURCHASE OF A DWELLING AT THE NEW OFFICIAL STATION, BUT THE SAME TYPES OF COSTS SHALL NOT BE PAID AT BOTH LOCATIONS. COSTS OF LITIGATION ARE NOT REIMBURSABLE." NOTHING IN THE ABOVE STATEMENT FROM YOUR ATTORNEY INDICATES THAT YOU WERE FURNISHED A LEGAL OPINION CONCERNING THE STATUS OF TITLE OF THE PROPERTY YOU PURCHASED. UPON YOUR FURNISHING EVIDENCE FROM YOUR ATTORNEY THAT HE PERFORMED A SERVICE WHICH MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ABOVE-QUOTED SECTION AND SHOWING THE EXACT CHARGE HE MADE THEREFOR, FURTHER CONSIDERATION WILL BE GIVEN THE MATTER PROVIDED SUCH COST HAS NOT ALREADY BEEN ADMINISTRATIVELY PAID. THE PAPERS FURNISHED BY YOU CONCERNING ANOTHER CASE SERVE NO USEFUL PURPOSE AS EACH CLAIM IS BASED UPON THE OFFICIAL RECORDS OF THE PARTICULAR CASE IN THE LIGHT OF THE APPLICABLE LAW AND REGULATION. HOWEVER, IT WOULD APPEAR FROM THOSE PAPERS THAT THE SERVICE THERE INVOLVED WAS RELATED TO SEARCHING TITLE, AN ITEM COVERED BY THE ABOVE-QUOTED SECTION 4.2C.

IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, THE DISALLOWANCE OF APRIL 20, 1970, UPON THE PRESENT RECORD MUST BE SUSTAINED. SEE B-168476, JUNE 12, 1970; B 163203, MARCH 24, 1969; AND B-163949, MAY 28, 1968, COPIES ENCLOSED.

GAO Contacts

Office of Public Affairs