B-169699, MAY 19, 1970

B-169699: May 19, 1970

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

"SETTLEMENT DATE" LIMITATION ON PROPERTY TRANSACTIONS MERE PLACING OF RESIDENCE ON MARKET IS NOT SUFFICIENT JUSTIFICATION FOR GRANTING 1-YEAR EXTENSION TO INITIAL 1-YEAR PERIOD ALLOWED EMPLOYEE. SALE AND PURCHASE OR LEASE TERMINATION ARRANGEMENT MUST HAVE BEEN ENTERED INTO WITHIN INITIAL 1 YEAR PERIOD FOLLOWING TRANSFER BEFORE EXTENSION MAY BE GRANTED. THERE IS NO INDICATION EMPLOYEE HERE ENTERED INTO ANY SUCH CONTRACT. SAYS HE WAS TRANSFERRED FROM JOHNSON CITY TO KNOXVILLE ON JANUARY 26. HE JUSTIFIES HIS REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION AS FOLLOWS: "IN FEBRUARY 1969 MY HOUSE WAS PLACED WITH DEVAULT & DEVAULT. THE HOUSE WAS VALUED AT $26. DUE TO THE MONEY MARKET WE HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO MOVE THE HOUSE AT A FAIR PRICE.

B-169699, MAY 19, 1970

OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES--TRANSFERS--RELOCATION EXPENSES--"SETTLEMENT DATE" LIMITATION ON PROPERTY TRANSACTIONS MERE PLACING OF RESIDENCE ON MARKET IS NOT SUFFICIENT JUSTIFICATION FOR GRANTING 1-YEAR EXTENSION TO INITIAL 1-YEAR PERIOD ALLOWED EMPLOYEE, AFTER DATE OF TRANSFER, TO EFFECT SETTLEMENT ON SALE OF RESIDENCE FOR ENTITLEMENT TO REIMBURSEMENT OF SALE EXPENSES, SINCE, UNDER BOB CIR. NO. A -56, SEC. 4.1E, SALE AND PURCHASE OR LEASE TERMINATION ARRANGEMENT MUST HAVE BEEN ENTERED INTO WITHIN INITIAL 1 YEAR PERIOD FOLLOWING TRANSFER BEFORE EXTENSION MAY BE GRANTED, AND THERE IS NO INDICATION EMPLOYEE HERE ENTERED INTO ANY SUCH CONTRACT. SEE COMP. GEN. DECS. CITED.

TO MR. C. H. JENKINS:

THIS REFERS TO YOUR LETTER DATED APRIL 14, 1970, REQUESTING A DECISION AS TO WHETHER MR. WILLIAM H. GRAHAM MAY BE GRANTED A ONE-YEAR EXTENSION IN ADDITION TO THE INITIAL ONE YEAR AFTER THE DATE OF HIS TRANSFER IN WHICH SETTLEMENT MAY BE MADE IN CONNECTION WITH THE SALE OF HIS HOUSE FOR WHICH REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES MAY BE ALLOWED.

MR. GRAHAM, IN HIS LETTER OF FEBRUARY 24, 1970, SAYS HE WAS TRANSFERRED FROM JOHNSON CITY TO KNOXVILLE ON JANUARY 26, 1969, AND HE JUSTIFIES HIS REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION AS FOLLOWS:

"IN FEBRUARY 1969 MY HOUSE WAS PLACED WITH DEVAULT & DEVAULT, REAL ESTATE AGENTS FOR SALE. AN APPRAISAL HAS BEEN MADE, THE HOUSE WAS VALUED AT $26,000.00 AND APPROVED FOR A $25,000.00 LOAN. DUE TO THE MONEY MARKET WE HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO MOVE THE HOUSE AT A FAIR PRICE. WITHIN THE LAST TWO WEEKS WE WERE OFFERED $21,000.00 WHICH IS UNREASONABLE."

YOU ASKED WHETHER IN OUR OPINION THE PLACING OF ONE'S RESIDENCE ON THE MARKET OR PLACING YOUR NEEDS FOR A RESIDENCE WITH A REALTOR IS SUFFICIENT JUSTIFICATION FOR EXTENSION OF THE SETTLEMENT TIME.

SECTION 4.1E OF BUREAU OF THE BUDGET CIRCULAR NO. A-56, EFFECTIVE JUNE 26, 1969, REGARDING RESIDENCE TRANSACTIONS PROVIDES IN PERTINENT PART THAT:

"THE SETTLEMENT DATES FOR THE SALE AND PURCHASE OR LEASE TERMINATION TRANSACTIONS FOR WHICH REIMBURSEMENT IS REQUESTED ARE NOT LATER THAN ONE (INITIAL) YEAR AFTER THE DATE ON WHICH THE EMPLOYEE REPORTED FOR DUTY AT THE NEW OFFICIAL STATION, EXCEPT THAT * * * (2) AN ADDITIONAL PERIOD OF TIME NOT IN EXCESS OF ONE YEAR MAY BE AUTHORIZED OR APPROVED BY THE HEAD OF THE AGENCY OR HIS DESIGNEE WHEN HE DETERMINES THAT CIRCUMSTANCES JUSTIFYING THE EXCEPTION EXIST WHICH PRECLUDED SETTLEMENT WITHIN THE INITIAL ONE-YEAR PERIOD OF THE SALE/PURCHASE CONTRACTS OR LEASE TERMINATION ARRANGEMENT ENTERED INTO IN GOOD FAITH BY THE EMPLOYEE WITHIN THE INITIAL ONE-YEAR PERIOD. * * *"

UNDER THE ABOVE REGULATIONS, A SALE AND PURCHASE OR LEASE TERMINATION ARRANGEMENT MUST HAVE BEEN ENTERED INTO WITHIN THE INITIAL ONE-YEAR PERIOD FOLLOWING THE TRANSFER BEFORE AN EXTENSION OF THE ONE-YEAR PERIOD MAY BE GRANTED. SEE B-168392, DECEMBER 16, 1969, AND B-168663, JANUARY 21, 1970, COPIES HEREWITH. SINCE THERE IS NO INDICATION THAT MR. GRAHAM ENTERED INTO A CONTRACT FOR THE SALE OF HIS RESIDENCE WITHIN THE INITIAL ONE-YEAR PERIOD IT APPEARS THAT NO AUTHORITY EXISTS FOR GRANTING AN EXTENSION IN HIS CASE.