B-132741, JUL. 22, 1958

B-132741: Jul 22, 1958

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

NORTH CAROLINA: FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF JULY 25. FOR THIS TRANSPORTATION YOU CLAIMED ORIGINALLY AND WERE PAID. IN OUR AUDIT YOU WERE FOUND OVERPAID $151.67. THE RATES USED BY YOU WERE FOUND PROPER. IN WHICH THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION HELD THAT THE RATES CHARGED WERE UNJUST AND UNREASONABLE TO THE EXTENT THEY EXCEEDED THE LESS-THAN-TRUCKLOAD RATES AT THE ACTUAL WEIGHTS OF THE SHIPMENTS AND THAT A MINIMUM-CHARGE RULE. WAS POTENTIALLY UNJUST AND UNREASONABLE AND SHOULD BE CANCELED. YOUR OBJECTION TO THE USE OF THE CITED CASES AS PRECEDENTS IS BASED ON THE FACT THAT THE CASES WERE DECIDED IN 1955 AND 1956. IT IS NOTED. IT IS NOT UNDERSTOOD THAT THE AVAILABILITY OF THE PRINCIPLE OF THE TWO COMMISSION CASES WAS LIMITED TO TRANSACTIONS OCCURRING ONLY AFTER THE DATES OF THE DECISIONS.

B-132741, JUL. 22, 1958

TO CAROLINA FREIGHT CARRIERS CORPORATION, CHERRYVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA:

FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF JULY 25, 1957, FILE CLAIM 057 -156, PROS. 431020 AND 22, CONCERNING A SHIPMENT OF MACHINERY PARTS, AIRPLANE PARTS, AND OTHER ARTICLES, TRANSPORTED FROM WESTOVER AIR FORCE BASE, CHICOPEE, MASSACHUSETTS, TO ROBINS AIR FORCE BASE, WARNER ROBINS, GEORGIA, UNDER GOVERNMENT BILL OF LADING AF-3366665, FEBRUARY 15, 1954.

FOR THIS TRANSPORTATION YOU CLAIMED ORIGINALLY AND WERE PAID, IN APRIL 1954, CHARGES OF $776.99, COMPUTED ON THE BASIS OF VARIOUS RATES. IN OUR AUDIT YOU WERE FOUND OVERPAID $151.67. THE RATES USED BY YOU WERE FOUND PROPER, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE RATE OF $1.86 PER 100 POUNDS ON THE 45 BOXES OF MACHINERY PARTS WEIGHING 7,240 POUNDS WHICH YOU APPLIED TO THE ACTUAL WEIGHT OF 7,240 POUNDS IN THIS CONNECTION. RESULTS FROM THE USE IN OUR AUDIT OF A RATE OF $3.52 PER 100 POUNDS APPLIED TO THE ACTUAL WEIGHT OF 7,240 POUNDS IN THIS CONNECTION.

YOU APPARENTLY BASE YOUR OBJECTION TO THE OVERPAYMENT DETERMINATION ISSUE WITH OUR RELIANCE UPON THE CASES OF ROYAL MANUFACTURING CO., INC., ASSERT ARRIVED AT DESTINATION WITH SEALS INTACT. IN ADDITION, YOU TAKE ISSUE WITH OUR RELIANCE UPON THE CASES OF ROYAL MANUFACTURING CO., INC., V. HUBER AND HUBER MOTOR EXPRESS, INC., 66 M.C.C. 237, AND HORSMAN DOLLS, INC. V. RISS AND COMPANY, 66 M.C.C. 697, IN WHICH THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION HELD THAT THE RATES CHARGED WERE UNJUST AND UNREASONABLE TO THE EXTENT THEY EXCEEDED THE LESS-THAN-TRUCKLOAD RATES AT THE ACTUAL WEIGHTS OF THE SHIPMENTS AND THAT A MINIMUM-CHARGE RULE, COMPARABLE TO THE ONE YOU ASSERT SHOULD BE GIVEN EFFECT, WAS POTENTIALLY UNJUST AND UNREASONABLE AND SHOULD BE CANCELED. YOUR OBJECTION TO THE USE OF THE CITED CASES AS PRECEDENTS IS BASED ON THE FACT THAT THE CASES WERE DECIDED IN 1955 AND 1956, WHILE THE SHIPMENT HERE IN QUESTION MOVED IN FEBRUARY 1954. IT IS NOTED, HOWEVER, THAT THE SHIPMENTS CONCERNED IN THE COMMISSION PROCEEDINGS MOVED IN NOVEMBER 1951 AND MAY 1953. AS NOTED, THE COMMISSION, IN BOTH INSTANCES, FOUND THE RATES APPLIED ON THOSE SHIPMENTS UNJUST AND UNREASONABLE. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, IT IS NOT UNDERSTOOD THAT THE AVAILABILITY OF THE PRINCIPLE OF THE TWO COMMISSION CASES WAS LIMITED TO TRANSACTIONS OCCURRING ONLY AFTER THE DATES OF THE DECISIONS.

THERE IS NO SUPPORT IN THE RECORD FOR YOUR ALLEGATION THAT TWO VEHICLES WERE ORDERED AND FURNISHED OR FOR THE INFERENCE THAT EXCLUSIVE USE WAS SPECIFICALLY REQUESTED OR REQUIRED. BILL OF LADING AF-3366665 DOES NOT BEAR ANY NOTATION INDICATING THE USE OF TWO VEHICLES OR A DEMAND OR NEED FOR EXCLUSIVE USE.

ACCORDINGLY, THE OVERPAYMENT OF $151.67 SHOULD BE REFUNDED PROMPTLY TO AVOID COLLECTION BY OTHER AVAILABLE MEANS.