B-157602, MAR. 4, 1966
Highlights
RECENTLY STATED TO YOU THAT HE WAS SURPRISED THAT OUR OFFICE HAD NOT PAID YOUR CLAIM. WAS FOR RETROACTIVE ADJUSTMENT OF SALARY AS AN EMPLOYEE OF THE FEDERAL HOUSING ADMINISTRATION. SUCH DETERMINATION WAS EVIDENCED BY THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT TYPED ON YOUR APPOINTMENT PAPERS SIGNED BY THAT OFFICIAL: "THE SALARY RATE IS SET AT THE TOP OF GRADE GS-3. THAT WHERE A CONFLICT OR DISCREPANCY EXISTS BETWEEN THE FACTS ADMINISTRATIVELY REPORTED AND THESE ALLEGED BY THE CLAIMANT WE ARE REQUIRED TO ACCEPT THE ADMINISTRATIVE VERSION IN THE ABSENCE OF A CLEAR SHOWING TO THE CONTRARY. WE NOTE THAT THE OFFICIAL ADMINISTRATIVE POSITION CONTINUES TO BE THAT NO ADMINISTRATIVE ERROR WAS MADE IN YOUR CASE.
B-157602, MAR. 4, 1966
TO MISS LORETTO B. FITZGERALD:
YOUR LETTERS OF FEBRUARY 1 AND 24, 1966, RELATE TO YOUR CLAIM FOR RETROACTIVE PAY. YOU SAY THAT THE LEGAL COUNSEL, FEDERAL HOUSING ADMINISTRATION, RECENTLY STATED TO YOU THAT HE WAS SURPRISED THAT OUR OFFICE HAD NOT PAID YOUR CLAIM. IN VIEW THEREOF YOU ASK THAT WE OBTAIN HIS OPINION AND THAT WE AGAIN REVIEW THE MATTER.
YOUR CLAIM TO OUR OFFICE DATED NOVEMBER 1, 1960, WAS FOR RETROACTIVE ADJUSTMENT OF SALARY AS AN EMPLOYEE OF THE FEDERAL HOUSING ADMINISTRATION, DENVER, COLORADO, BY REASON OF PRIOR SERVICE AT A HIGHER RATE OF PAY. DISALLOWED THE CLAIM BY OFFICE SETTLEMENT OF FEBRUARY 17, 1961, BECAUSE THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS SHOWED THAT UPON YOUR TRANSFER FEBRUARY 21, 1955, THE FIELD OFFICE DIRECTOR AT DENVER WHO HAD THE AUTHORITY TO FIX THE RATE YOU WOULD BE PAID, DETERMINED THAT YOUR SALARY RATE WOULD BE $3,430 PER ANNUM INSTEAD OF $3,510 PER ANNUM. SUCH DETERMINATION WAS EVIDENCED BY THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT TYPED ON YOUR APPOINTMENT PAPERS SIGNED BY THAT OFFICIAL:
"THE SALARY RATE IS SET AT THE TOP OF GRADE GS-3, DUE REGARD HAVING (BEEN) PAID TO THE RIGHTS AND INTERESTS OF THE EMPLOYEE AND THE OFFICE.'
THUS THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE REPORTED TO US THAT AN ADMINISTRATIVE ERROR HAD NOT BEEN MADE. HOWEVER, YOU CONTENDED THAT AN ADMINISTRATIVE ERROR HAD BEEN MADE IN THIS REGARD.
WITH RESPECT TO THAT SITUATION WE POINTED OUT IN OUR DECISION TO YOU OF OCTOBER 18, 1965, B-157602, THAT WHERE A CONFLICT OR DISCREPANCY EXISTS BETWEEN THE FACTS ADMINISTRATIVELY REPORTED AND THESE ALLEGED BY THE CLAIMANT WE ARE REQUIRED TO ACCEPT THE ADMINISTRATIVE VERSION IN THE ABSENCE OF A CLEAR SHOWING TO THE CONTRARY. WE FIND NO INFORMATION IN YOUR LETTER OF FEBRUARY 24 THAT WOULD AFFECT THE DETERMINATION MADE IN YOUR CASE.
UPON OUR REVIEW OF THE OPINION OF JULY 7, 1965, BY THE GENERAL COUNSEL, FEDERAL HOUSING ADMINISTRATION, WE NOTE THAT THE OFFICIAL ADMINISTRATIVE POSITION CONTINUES TO BE THAT NO ADMINISTRATIVE ERROR WAS MADE IN YOUR CASE. IN HIS OPINION HE CONCURS IN OUR VIEW THAT NO PROPER BASIS EXISTS TO RETROACTIVELY ADJUST YOUR COMPENSATION.
IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING WE MUST SUSTAIN OUR PREVIOUS DISALLOWANCE OF YOUR CLAIM.