B-175426, MAY 11, 1972

B-175426: May 11, 1972

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

THAT LINE-HAUL AND OTHER CHARGES ARE COMPUTABLE ON THE BASIS OF THE ACTUAL WEIGHT DELIVERED. THE PRIOR DISALLOWANCE IS SUSTAINED. WHICH IS IN EFFECT A REQUEST FOR REVIEW OF THE SETTLEMENT CERTIFICATE IN CLAIM TK-934205 DATED FEBRUARY 14. YOU EXPLAINED THAT THE SUPPLEMENTAL BILL WAS BASED ON THE WEIGHT OF 3. 990 POUNDS WAS PRODUCED BECAUSE 1. 400 POUNDS OF HOUSEHOLD GOODS WERE STOLEN FROM YOUR TRAILER AT ALEXANDRIA. YOU THEREFORE BELIEVED THAT YOU WERE DUE AN ADDITIONAL $81 FOR THE LINE- HAUL SERVICE. THE SUPPLEMENTAL BILL WAS FORWARDED TO OUR OFFICE FOR DIRECT SETTLEMENT. YOU WERE ADVISED THAT THE TRANSPORTATION AND ACCESSORIAL CHARGES SHOULD BE BASED ON THE WEIGHT TRANSPORTED FROM ORIGIN TO DESTINATION.

B-175426, MAY 11, 1972

TRANSPORTATION - GOVERNMENT BILL OF LADING - FREIGHT CHARGES - METHOD OF COMPUTATION DECISION AFFIRMING PRIOR DENIAL OF A CLAIM OF PLYMOUTH VAN LINES, INC., FOR ADDITIONAL TRANSPORTATION CHARGES ON A SHIPMENT OF HOUSEHOLD GOODS SENT UNDER A GOVERNMENT BILL OF LADING FROM RICHMOND HILL, N.Y., TO FORT BRAGG, N.C. SINCE THE GOVERNMENT RECEIVED NO BENEFIT FROM THE QUANTITY OF GOODS STOLEN IN ROUTE, IT CONTINUES TO BE THE OPINION OF THE COMP. GEN. THAT LINE-HAUL AND OTHER CHARGES ARE COMPUTABLE ON THE BASIS OF THE ACTUAL WEIGHT DELIVERED. ACCORDINGLY, THE PRIOR DISALLOWANCE IS SUSTAINED.

TO PLYMOUTH VAN LINES, INC.:

WE REFER AGAIN TO YOUR LETTER OF MARCH 2, 1972, WHICH IS IN EFFECT A REQUEST FOR REVIEW OF THE SETTLEMENT CERTIFICATE IN CLAIM TK-934205 DATED FEBRUARY 14, 1972. THE SETTLEMENT DISALLOWED YOUR CLAIM FOR $101.65, PER YOUR SUPPLEMENTAL BILL DATED MAY 26, 1971, FOR SERVICES FURNISHED ON A SHIPMENT OF HOUSEHOLD GOODS WEIGHING 3,390 POUNDS TRANSPORTED FROM RICHMOND HILL, NEW YORK, TO FORT BRAGG, NORTH CAROLINA, UNDER GOVERNMENT BILL OF LADING F-3181581, ISSUED IN OCTOBER 1970.

FOR THESE SERVICES THE ARMY FINANCE CENTER AT INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA, PAID YOUR BILL NO. 27640 IN JANUARY 1971, FOR $322.35, BASED ON THE WEIGHT, 1,990 POUNDS, DELIVERED AT DESTINATION. THIS AMOUNT INCLUDED A $172 LINE- HAUL CHARGE; A $124 MAXIMUM PACKING CHARGE; A $6.32 "SHIPMENT CHARGE"; A $10 SURCHARGE, AND A $10 APPLIANCE (WASHER) SERVICE CHARGE.

WITH YOUR LETTER OF MAY 28, 1971, TO THE ARMY FINANCE CENTER, YOU SUBMITTED A SUPPLEMENTAL BILL FOR AN ADDITIONAL AMOUNT OF $101.65. YOU EXPLAINED THAT THE SUPPLEMENTAL BILL WAS BASED ON THE WEIGHT OF 3,390 POUNDS ACCEPTED FOR TRANSPORTATION AT POINT OF ORIGIN, AND THAT THE REDUCED DELIVERED WEIGHT OF 1,990 POUNDS WAS PRODUCED BECAUSE 1,400 POUNDS OF HOUSEHOLD GOODS WERE STOLEN FROM YOUR TRAILER AT ALEXANDRIA, VIRGINIA. YOU THEREFORE BELIEVED THAT YOU WERE DUE AN ADDITIONAL $81 FOR THE LINE- HAUL SERVICE, $4.40 FOR THE "SHIPMENT CHARGE," $10 FOR THE SURCHARGE, AND $6.25, FOR THE MAXIMUM PACKING CHARGE. THE SUPPLEMENTAL BILL WAS FORWARDED TO OUR OFFICE FOR DIRECT SETTLEMENT.

IN THE SETTLEMENT CERTIFICATE DISALLOWING YOUR CLAIM FOR $101.65, YOU WERE ADVISED THAT THE TRANSPORTATION AND ACCESSORIAL CHARGES SHOULD BE BASED ON THE WEIGHT TRANSPORTED FROM ORIGIN TO DESTINATION. CITED IN SUPPORT OF THE DISALLOWANCE WAS ALCOA STEAMSHIP CO. V UNITED STATES, 338 U.S. 421 (1949), WHICH UPHELD THE DISALLOWANCE OF AN OCEAN CARRIER'S CLAIM FOR FREIGHT CHARGES ON A GOVERNMENT BILL OF LADING BECAUSE OF LOSS OF GOODS DUE TO ENEMY ACTION.

IN YOUR REQUEST FOR REVIEW YOU CONCEDE THAT YOU ARE NOT ENTITLED TO THE ADDITIONAL TRANSPORTATION CHARGES OF $81, BUT YOU RENEW YOUR REQUEST FOR PAYMENT OF THE OTHER CHARGES. WE DO NOT BELIEVE THAT YOU ARE ENTITLED TO ANY ADDITIONAL CHARGES FOR THE TRANSPORTATION INVOLVED. IN OUR OPINION, NOT ONLY THE LINE-HAUL, BUT THE OTHER CHARGES AS WELL ARE COMPUTABLE ON THE BASIS OF THE REDUCED DELIVERED WEIGHT FOR WHICH YOU WERE RESPONSIBLE.

WHILE THE INCIDENTAL CHARGES WERE INITIALLY DETERMINABLE ON THE BASIS OF THE 3,390 POUNDS TENDERED AT ORIGIN, YOUR RIGHT TO SUCH CHARGES WOULD NOT VEST UNTIL YOU DELIVERED THE SAME WEIGHT OF HOUSEHOLD GOODS TO THE DESTINATION SHOWN ON THE BILL OF LADING. THE UNITED STATES RECEIVED NO BENEFIT FROM THE CARRIER HANDLING OF THE 1,400 POUNDS STOLEN AT ALEXANDRIA; AND IT THEREFORE RECEIVED NO CONSIDERATION FOR THE SEVERAL INCIDENTAL CHARGES ASSOCIATED WITH THE MISSING 1,400 POUNDS.

SINCE THE DISALLOWANCE IN THE SETTLEMENT CERTIFICATE IS NOT OTHERWISE SHOWN TO HAVE BEEN IN ERROR, IT IS SUSTAINED.