B-144154, JUN. 26, 1961
Highlights
LTD.: FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF SEPTEMBER 29. FOR THIS SERVICE YOU CLAIMED AND WERE PAID ON THE BASIS OF A COMBINATION OF RATES MADE OVER STOCKTON. WHILE IN OUR AUDIT THE CHARGES WERE COMPUTED BY USE OF THROUGH RATE APPLICABLE ONLY TO A SINGLE- LINE SERVICE PERFORMED BY YOUR COMPANY. A DEDUCTION OF $107.02 WAS MADE. YOU AGREE THAT YOUR COMPANY ALONE COULD HAVE MOVED THE SHIPMENT FROM ORIGIN TO DESTINATION AND. YOU ASSERT THAT THE SHIPMENT WAS NOT TENDERED TO YOUR COMPANY BUT WAS TENDERED TO DELTA LINES. IN VIEW OF YOUR CONTENTIONS WE REQUESTED THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE CONCERNED TO FURNISH US THE NAME OF THE CARRIER TO WHICH THIS SHIPMENT WAS ACTUALLY TENDERED. THEY HAVE REPORTED THAT THE SHIPPER'S RECORDS INDICATE THAT THE SHIPMENT WAS ACTUALLY TENDERED TO YOUR COMPANY.
B-144154, JUN. 26, 1961
TO WESTERN TRUCK LINES, LTD.:
FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF SEPTEMBER 29, 1960, YOUR CLAIM G-02068, IN WHICH YOU REQUESTED REVIEW OF THE SETTLEMENT CERTIFICATE DATED AUGUST 17, 1960, DISALLOWING YOUR CLAIM FOR $107.02 ADDITIONAL CHARGES FOR THE TRANSPORTATION OF A SHIPMENT OF FOODSTUFFS FROM LYOTH, CALIFORNIA, TO PICKEL MEADOWS, CALIFORNIA, UNDER GOVERNMENT BILL OF LADING WY-8372930, DURING JANUARY 1958.
FOR THIS SERVICE YOU CLAIMED AND WERE PAID ON THE BASIS OF A COMBINATION OF RATES MADE OVER STOCKTON, CALIFORNIA, CONSIDERING DELTA LINES, INC., AND YOUR COMPANY AS PARTICIPATING IN A JOINT HAUL, WHILE IN OUR AUDIT THE CHARGES WERE COMPUTED BY USE OF THROUGH RATE APPLICABLE ONLY TO A SINGLE- LINE SERVICE PERFORMED BY YOUR COMPANY. UPON YOUR FAILURE TO REFUND THE DIFFERENCE, A DEDUCTION OF $107.02 WAS MADE.
THE BILL OF LADING SHOWS YOUR COMPANY (1) AS THE INITIAL TRANSPORTATION COMPANY, (2) AS THE SOLE CARRIER NAMED IN THE ROUTING INSTRUCTIONS, AND (3) AS RECEIPTING FOR THE SHIPMENT WITH DELTA" SIGNING AS AGENT.
YOU AGREE THAT YOUR COMPANY ALONE COULD HAVE MOVED THE SHIPMENT FROM ORIGIN TO DESTINATION AND, IN THAT EVENT, THE THROUGH CHARGES WOULD APPLY. HOWEVER, YOU ASSERT THAT THE SHIPMENT WAS NOT TENDERED TO YOUR COMPANY BUT WAS TENDERED TO DELTA LINES, INC., WHO YOU SAY DID NOT ACT AS YOUR AGENT NOR HAS EVER ACTED AS YOUR AGENT IN CONNECTION WITH EITHER INTRASTATE OR INTERSTATE TRAFFIC.
IN VIEW OF YOUR CONTENTIONS WE REQUESTED THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE CONCERNED TO FURNISH US THE NAME OF THE CARRIER TO WHICH THIS SHIPMENT WAS ACTUALLY TENDERED. THEY HAVE REPORTED THAT THE SHIPPER'S RECORDS INDICATE THAT THE SHIPMENT WAS ACTUALLY TENDERED TO YOUR COMPANY. THEY FURTHER ADVISE THAT IN AN INVESTIGATION WITH DELTA, DELTA INFORMED THEM THAT IT HAD RECEIVED A REQUEST FROM MR. BERG, THE LOCAL AGENT FOR YOUR COMPANY, ASKING DELTA TO PICK UP THE SHIPMENT FOR YOUR COMPANY.
IN VIEW OF THE CONFLICTING STATEMENTS AS TO THE ARRANGEMENTS MADE FOR THE PICKUP OF THIS SHIPMENT CONSIDERED TOGETHER WITH THE INFORMATION CONTAINED ON THE ACCOMPLISHED BILL OF LADING INDICATING THE TENDER OF THIS SHIPMENT TO YOUR COMPANY INITIALLY, WE HAVE NO RECOURSE BUT TO RESOLVE THE DOUBT IN FAVOR OF THE GOVERNMENT. SEE FOOTNOTE 4, PAGE 256, UNITED STATES V. N.Y., N.H. AND H.R.CO., 355 U.S. 253, CITING CHARLES V. UNITED STATES, 19 CT.CL. 360. ACCORDINGLY, THE SETTLEMENT ACTION IS SUSTAINED.