B-142671, NOV. 9, 1960

B-142671, NOV. 9, 1960

TO WILSON FREIGHT FORWARDING COMPANY:

FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF SEPTEMBER 26, 1960, WHICH WAS IN REPLY TO OUR DECISION OF AUGUST 17, 1960, B-142671, WHEREIN WE SUSTAINED THE DISALLOWANCE OF YOUR CLAIM FOR $80.87, COVERED BY YOUR BILL NO. 2089-A, OUR CLAIM NO. TK-681818. YOUR CLAIM WAS BASED ON THE MINIMUM TRUCKLOAD CHARGE FOR A CAPACITY LOAD OF FREIGHT AS PROVIDED IN ITEM 4550, AS AMENDED, OF CENTRAL AND SOUTHERN MOTOR FREIGHT TARIFF ASSOCIATION TARIFF NO. 100, MF-I.C.C. NO. 117.

WE SUSTAINED THE DISALLOWANCE OF YOUR CLAIM ON THE GROUND THAT NO EVIDENCE HAD BEEN PRESENTED TO SHOW THAT THE SHIPMENT IN QUESTION CONSISTED OF A CAPACITY LOAD OF FREIGHT WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE TARIFF ITEM. WITH YOUR LETTER OF SEPTEMBER 26, YOU SUBMITTED COPIES OF MEEKS MOTOR FREIGHT BILL NO. 467912, WESTERN TRUCKING COMPANY CLAIM TRANSMITTAL FORM, AND WESTERN TRUCKING COMPANY MANIFEST NO. 0081, DATED APRIL 1, 1955.

NEITHER THE FREIGHT BILL NOR THE MANIFEST BEARS A NOTATION THAT THE SHIPMENT IN QUESTION CONSISTED OF A CAPACITY LOAD. IN THIS CONNECTION YOUR ATTENTION IS INVITED TO THE REQUIREMENT OF ITEM 4550, AS AMENDED, THAT THE ORIGINATING CARRIER (WHEN TWO OR MORE CARRIERS ARE INVOLVED) SHALL ENDORSE ON THE FREIGHT BILL OR OTHER PAPERS ACCOMPANYING THE SHIPMENT A SPECIFIED NOTATION INDICATING THAT A VEHICLE (OR VEHICLES, WHERE MORE THAN ONE WAS REQUIRED), LOADED TO CAPACITY, WAS FURNISHED BY SUCH CARRIER TO ACCOMMODATE THE SHIPMENT.

SINCE THE FREIGHT BILL AND THE MANIFEST DO NOT BEAR SUCH NOTATIONS, WE CANNOT CONSIDER THE DOCUMENTS AS PROOF THAT THIS SHIPMENT CONSISTED OF A CAPACITY LOAD OF FREIGHT. WERE WE TO AUTHORIZE PAYMENT OF YOUR CLAIM ON THE BASIS OF THE RECORD BEFORE US, WE WOULD BE DOING SO UPON AN UNWARRANTED ASSUMPTION OF FACT. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THEREFORE, THE CONCLUSION REACHED IN OUR DECISION OF AUGUST 17 IS AFFIRMED.