B-151323, JUN. 20, 1963
Highlights
20 PERCENT OF WHICH AMOUNT IS TO BE DEDUCTED AS LIQUIDATED DAMAGES FOR DEFAULT ON A CONTRACT TO PURCHASE. WE REGARD THIS AS UNNECESSARY BECAUSE IN OUR DECISION WE CONCLUDED THAT EVEN IF BOTH PARTIES WERE MUTUALLY MISTAKEN AS TO THE POSSIBILITY OF REMOVING THE LOCOMOTIVES. THE JURISDICTION OF OUR OFFICE TO SETTLE CLAIMS OF THIS NATURE IS LIMITED TO THOSE HAVING A LEGAL BASIS. WE HAVE NO AUTHORITY TO ALLOW CLAIMS BASED SOLELY ON EQUITABLE OR MORAL CONSIDERATION.
B-151323, JUN. 20, 1963
TO THE UNITED ROAD MACHINERY COMPANY:
IN YOUR LETTERS OF MAY 24 AND JUNE 1, 1963, YOU REQUEST RECONSIDERATION OF OUR DECISION DATED MAY 20, 1963, IN WHICH WE DENIED YOUR CLAIM FOR THE TOTAL REFUND OF YOUR $28,500 BID DEPOSIT, 20 PERCENT OF WHICH AMOUNT IS TO BE DEDUCTED AS LIQUIDATED DAMAGES FOR DEFAULT ON A CONTRACT TO PURCHASE, AMONG OTHER ITEMS, FIVE DIESEL ELECTRIC LOCOMOTIVES.
YOU OFFER TO SUBMIT EVIDENCE SUPPORTING YOUR CONTENTION THAT THE LOCOMOTIVES YOU PURCHASED COULD NOT BE REMOVED. WE REGARD THIS AS UNNECESSARY BECAUSE IN OUR DECISION WE CONCLUDED THAT EVEN IF BOTH PARTIES WERE MUTUALLY MISTAKEN AS TO THE POSSIBILITY OF REMOVING THE LOCOMOTIVES, YOU HAD ASSUMED ANY AND ALL RISK INVOLVED IN THE REMOVAL. SEE UNITED STATES V. F. C. HATHAWAY, 242 F.2D 897.
YOU CONCEDE THAT YOUR CLAIM MAY NOT BE FOR ALLOWANCE ON A LEGAL BASIS BUT YOU SUBMIT THAT REFUND IN THE FULL AMOUNT SHOULD BE MADE ON THE BASIS OF EQUITY. HOWEVER, THE JURISDICTION OF OUR OFFICE TO SETTLE CLAIMS OF THIS NATURE IS LIMITED TO THOSE HAVING A LEGAL BASIS. WE HAVE NO AUTHORITY TO ALLOW CLAIMS BASED SOLELY ON EQUITABLE OR MORAL CONSIDERATION. SEE B- 142716, DATED MAY 12, 1961. THE CLAIM, THEREFORE, MUST AGAIN BE DENIED.