A-42379, MAY 12, 1932, 11 COMP. GEN. 430

A-42379: May 12, 1932

Additional Materials:

Contact:

Edda Emmanuelli Perez
(202) 512-2853
EmmanuelliPerezE@gao.gov

 

Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800
youngc1@gao.gov

THE EXCESS COST OF DRAYAGE FROM THE POINT OF ACTUAL DELIVERY AS COMPARED WITH THE COST OF DRAYAGE FROM THE PROPERLY DESIGNATED POINT OF DELIVERY IS CHARGEABLE TO THE CARRIER. WHEREIN THE AMOUNT OF $56.85 WAS DISALLOWED. REPRESENTING THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE DRAYAGE CHARGE INCURRED AND THE CHARGE THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN INCURRED IF PROPER DELIVERY HAD BEEN AFFECTED BY THE EASTERN STEAMSHIP LINES (INC.). NOTIFIED THE CONSIGNEE THAT THE SHIPMENT WAS ON HAND AT PIER 26 AND WOULD BE SUBJECT TO STORAGE CHARGES UNLESS REMOVED WITHIN 48 HOURS AND THAT THE CONSIGNEE. AFTER AN ATTEMPT TO HAVE THE EASTERN STEAMSHIP LINES DELIVER THE SHIPMENT AT THE LONG ISLAND CITY TERMINAL. TO THE POST OFFICE AT LONG ISLAND CITY AT A CHARGE OF $95 WHICH WAS PAID BY J.

A-42379, MAY 12, 1932, 11 COMP. GEN. 430

TRANSPORTATION - ERRONEOUS DELIVERY - EXCESS DRAYAGE COSTS WHERE A CARRIER FAILS TO MAKE DELIVERY AT A DESIGNATED DESTINATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE BILL OF LADING INSTRUCTIONS, THE EXCESS COST OF DRAYAGE FROM THE POINT OF ACTUAL DELIVERY AS COMPARED WITH THE COST OF DRAYAGE FROM THE PROPERLY DESIGNATED POINT OF DELIVERY IS CHARGEABLE TO THE CARRIER.

DECISION BY ASSISTANT COMPTROLLER GENERAL ELLIOTT, MAY 12, 1932:

THE EASTERN STEAMSHIP LINES (INC.) HAS REQUESTED REVIEW OF SETTLEMENT T- 72699, NOVEMBER 20, 1930, OF THE CARRIER'S BILL F-538, WHEREIN THE AMOUNT OF $56.85 WAS DISALLOWED, REPRESENTING THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE DRAYAGE CHARGE INCURRED AND THE CHARGE THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN INCURRED IF PROPER DELIVERY HAD BEEN AFFECTED BY THE EASTERN STEAMSHIP LINES (INC.) OF A SHIPMENT OF 19,075 POUNDS POST OFFICE EQUIPMENT FROM THE KEYLESS LOCK CO., BRIGHTWOOD, IND., CONSIGNED TO THE CUSTODIAN, UNITED STATES POST OFFICE, LONG ISLAND CITY, N.Y., PER BILL OF LADING T-14213, OCTOBER 23, 1929.

IT APPEARS THAT THE EASTERN STEAMSHIP LINES TRANSPORTED THE SHIPMENT TO PIER 26, NORTH RIVER, NEW YORK CITY, AND NOTIFIED THE CONSIGNEE THAT THE SHIPMENT WAS ON HAND AT PIER 26 AND WOULD BE SUBJECT TO STORAGE CHARGES UNLESS REMOVED WITHIN 48 HOURS AND THAT THE CONSIGNEE, AFTER AN ATTEMPT TO HAVE THE EASTERN STEAMSHIP LINES DELIVER THE SHIPMENT AT THE LONG ISLAND CITY TERMINAL, ENGAGED THE BOWRON TRANSFER CO. (INC.) TO HAUL THE FREIGHT FROM PIER 26, NORTH RIVER, TO THE POST OFFICE AT LONG ISLAND CITY AT A CHARGE OF $95 WHICH WAS PAID BY J. L. SUMMERS PER VOUCHER 122446, DECEMBER 10, 1929. THE EASTERN STEAMSHIP LINES PRESENTED A BILL FOR $162.14 AND THIS AMOUNT WAS FOUND TO BE THE PROPER CHARGE FOR THE SERVICE CALLED FOR ON THE BILL OF LADING, BUT THE ALLOWANCE WAS MADE FOR $105.29, A DEDUCTION OF $56.85 BEING MADE BECAUSE THE CONSIGNEE WAS COMPELLED TO TAKE DELIVERY AT THE NEW YORK CITY, PIER 26, STATION OWING TO THE CARRIER'S FAILURE TO MAKE DELIVERY AT LONG ISLAND CITY TERMINAL.

THE CARRIER, IN ITS APPLICATION FOR REVIEW, HAS REFERRED TO ITS TARIFF I.C.C. A-17, SUPPLEMENT 12, ITEM 28-A, AS PROVIDING IN PART, THAT---

ALL FREIGHT DESTINED TO * * * LONG ISLAND CITY, * * * WILL BE DELIVERED AT * * * PIERS, 25 AND 26, * * * AND CONSIGNEES WILL BE NOTIFIED THAT THEIR FREIGHT IS AT THESE PIERS READY FOR DELIVERY, IT BEING UNDERSTOOD THAT DELIVERY FROM THIS COMPANY'S PIERS IS DESIRED; UNLESS ON, BEFORE, OR AFTER ARRIVAL OF SHIPMENT IN NEW YORK, N.Y., AND PRIOR TO THE EXPIRATION OF FREE TIME ALLOWED * * *, THE NEW YORK AGENT OF THIS COMPANY RECEIVES INSTRUCTIONS TO THE CONTRARY AND THAT DELIVERY IS DESIRED * * * TO A POINT * * * WITHIN THE LIGHTERAGE LIMITS OF NEW YORK HARBOR * * *.

FROM THE INFORMATION AT HAND, IT APPEARS THAT THE CONSIGNEE ENDEAVORED, WITHIN THE FREE TIME PERIOD, TO HAVE THE CARRIER MAKE DELIVERY AT LONG ISLAND CITY, N.Y., BUT WAS UNSUCCESSFUL AND, CONSEQUENTLY, ENGAGED THE BOWRON TRANSFER CO. TO DRAY THE SHIPMENT FROM PIER 26 TO THE LONG ISLAND CITY POST OFFICE.

THE BILL OF LADING SPECIFICALLY CONSIGNED THE SHIPMENT TO LONG ISLAND CITY, N.Y., THERE TO BE DELIVERED TO THE CUSTODIAN, UNITED STATES POST OFFICE, LONG ISLAND CITY, N.Y., WITH THE SPECIFIC DIRECTION THAT THE SHIPMENT WAS TO BE LIGHTERED TO THE LONG ISLAND CITY TERMINAL. THE WAYBILL ISSUED BY THE INITIAL CARRIER DIRECTED THAT THE DELIVERY WAS TO BE MADE AT THE SAME POINT, TO THE SAME CONSIGNEE, AND IN THE SAME MANNER.

THUS IT APPEARS THAT ON ARRIVAL OF THE SHIPMENT AT NEW YORK CITY, THE CARRIER'S NEW YORK AGENT HAD INSTRUCTIONS THAT THE SHIPMENT WAS NOT TO BE DELIVERED AT PIER 26, NORTH RIVER, BUT WAS TO BE DELIVERED TO THE LONG ISLAND CITY TERMINAL BY LIGHTER. THAT THESE INSTRUCTIONS WERE NOT OVERLOOKED IS EVIDENCED BY THE FACT THAT THE CARRIER'S "ARRIVAL NOTICE" ALSO SPECIFIED DELIVERY TO BE "LIGHTERAGE TO LONG ISLAND CITY TERM.' VIEW OF THE FACTS IT IS NOT CLEAR WHY SUCH DELIVERY WAS NOT MADE.

IT APPEARS, FURTHER, THAT THE SHIPMENT ON BILL OF LADING T 14213REPRESENTED APPROXIMATELY ONE-HALF OF ORDER NO. 3880 FOR EQUIPMENT, THE REMAINDER HAVING BEEN SHIPPED ON BILL OF LADING T 20691, NOVEMBER 15, 1929, CONSIGNED AND ROUTED IDENTICALLY AS DIRECTED IN BILL OF LADING T- 14213 AND CALLING FOR THE SAME DELIVERY, I.E., "LIGHTERAGE TO LONG ISLAND CITY TERMINAL.' THE SHIPMENT ON BILL OF LADING T-20691 WAS DELIVERED AT THE LONG ISLAND CITY TERMINAL. THIS SHIPMENT, WHICH WEIGHED 23,600 POUNDS AND THE TRANSPORTATION CHARGE FOR WHICH WAS INCLUDED IN EASTERN STEAMSHIP LINES' BILL F-652 AND PAID BY CHECK 935492, JUNE 4, 1930, PER VOUCHER 251456, ACCOUNTS OF J.L. SUMMERS, DISBURSING CLERK, TREASURY DEPARTMENT, WAS DRAYED FROM LONG ISLAND CITY TERMINAL TO THE UNITED STATES POST OFFICE BY THE BOWRON TRANSFER CO. AT A COST OF $47.20 (ON A BASIS OF 20 CENTS PER CWT.) PAID BY J. L. SUMMERS, PER VOUCHER 147776, JANUARY 15, 1930.

UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 15 (8) OF THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE ACT THE SHIPPER HAS THE RIGHT TO DESIGNATE IN WRITING THE ROUTE OVER WHICH THE SHIPMENT SHALL BE TRANSPORTED AND IT IS THE DUTY OF THE CARRIER TO COMPLY WITH SUCH INSTRUCTIONS. THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION IN CONFERENCE RULINGS 214 (B) AS AMENDED BY 321 HELD THAT IN ORDER TO SECURE DESIRED DELIVERY TO INDUSTRIES, PLANTS, OR WAREHOUSES AND AVOID UNNECESSARY TERMINAL OR SWITCHING CHARGES, THE SHIPPER MAY DIRECT AS TO TERMINAL ROUTING OR DELIVERY AND HIS INSTRUCTIONS AS TO SUCH TERMINAL DELIVERY MUST BE OBSERVED IN ROUTING AND BILLING SUCH SHIPMENTS, AND IN CONFERENCE RULING 474 THE COMMISSION HELD THAT IT IS THE DUTY OF A CARRIER TO MAKE DELIVERY IN ACCORDANCE WITH ROUTING DIRECTIONS.

WHERE SUCH ROUTING INSTRUCTIONS HAVE NOT BEEN FOLLOWED AND DELIVERY IS TENDERED AT ANOTHER TERMINAL THAN THAT DESIGNATED, IT REMAINS THE DUTY OF THE DELIVERING CARRIER TO MAKE DELIVERY AT THE TERMINAL DESIGNATED IN ROUTING INSTRUCTIONS, WHETHER IT BE BY A SWITCH MOVEMENT OR BY CARTING, AND IN CONFERENCE RULING 509 THE COMMISSION HELD THAT IN CASE THE CONSIGNEE ELECTS TO ACCEPT THE SHIPMENT AT THE TERMINAL WHERE DELIVERY HAS BEEN ERRONEOUSLY OFFERED RATHER THAN INSIST UPON DELIVERY AT THE TERMINAL DESIGNATED, THE SHIPPER OR THE CONSIGNEE IS ENTITLED TO RECOVER DAMAGES IN THE SUM OF THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE EXPENSE OF DRAYAGE ACTUALLY INCURRED AT A REASONABLE CHARGE THEREFOR AND THE EXPENSE WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN INCURRED IF PROPER DELIVERY AHD BEEN EFFECTED BY THE CARRIER.

HAD THE CARRIER COMPLIED WITH SHIPPER'S TERMINAL DELIVERY INSTRUCTIONS IN THE CASE OF THE SHIPMENT ON BILL OF LADING T-14213, AS IT DID IN THE CASE OF BILL OF LADING T-20691, THE DRAYAGE TO THE UNITED STATES POST OFFICE WOULD HAVE COST 20 CENTS PER CWT., AS WAS CHARGED BY THE BOWRON TRANSFER CO., ON THE SECOND SHIPMENT, INSTEAD OF $95 AS WAS CHARGED BY THE BOWRON TRANSFER CO. FOR DRAYING 19,075 POUNDS FROM THE DOCK OF THE EASTERN STEAMSHIP CO. IN NEW YORK CITY TO THE UNITED STATES POST OFFICE IN LONG ISLAND CITY.

THE EXCESS DRAYAGE CHARGE, DUE TO THE NONDELIVERY OF THE SHIPMENT TO THE TERMINAL IN LONG ISLAND CITY, WAS AN EXPENSE CAUSED BY THE CARRIER'S FAILURE TO OBSERVE THE ROUTING INSTRUCTIONS ON THE BILL OF LADING AND WAYBILL AND THE DEDUCTION FROM THE TRANSPORTATION CHARGES OTHERWISE DUE THE CARRIER APPEARS TO BE CORRECT.