B-121856, SEP. 7, 1955

B-121856, SEP. 7, 1955

TO HONORABLE EDMUND F. MANSURE, ADMINISTRATOR, GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION:

REFERRING TO YOUR LETTER OF NOVEMBER 15, 1954, TRANSMITTING A REPORT CONCERNING COMPLAINTS RECEIVED FROM THE MOVERS CONFERENCE OF AMERICA RELATIVE TO A MOVE OF THE FEDERAL CIVIL DEFENSE ADMINISTRATION FROM WASHINGTON, D.C., TO BATTLE CREEK, MICHIGAN, THERE IS ENCLOSED A COPY OF OUR LETTER OF TODAY TO THAT ORGANIZATION.

ALTHOUGH, AS INDICATED IN THE ENCLOSED LETTER, WE FOUND NO BASIS FOR ANY ACTION BY THIS OFFICE IN THE MATTER, OUR INVESTIGATION DID DEVELOP CERTAIN POINTS WHICH WE FEEL SHOULD BE BROUGHT TO YOUR ATTENTION FOR CORRECTIVE ACTION IN FUTURE OPERATIONS OF THE KIND INVOLVED.

SINCE THE PROCEDURE ADOPTED BY YOUR AGENCY INVOLVED THE FURNISHING OF SERVICES, ALL OF WHICH WERE NOT REGULATED BY THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION OR ANY OTHER AGENCY, AND AS TO WHICH NO RATES OF SCHEDULES OF CHARGES WERE FIXED, IT IS OUR VIEW THAT PROCUREMENT OF SUCH SERVICES FROM OTHER THAN AUTHORIZED HOUSEHOLD GOODS MOVERS WAS SUBJECT TO THE FORMAL CONTRACTUAL REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 3709, REVISED STATUTES, 41 U.S.C. 5, OR TITLE III OF THE FEDERAL PROPERTY AND ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES ACT OF 1949, 63 STAT. 393, AND THAT, THEREFORE, A FORMAL CONTRACT AWARD WAS REQUIRED. IT APPEARS THAT A REQUEST FOR QUOTATIONS WAS ISSUED BY YOUR AGENCY BUT NO RECORD HAS BEEN FOUND OF ANY EXECUTED CONTRACT OR OF ANY FORMAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE PROPOSAL OF RAY HAMILTON AND COMPANY, NOR IS IT ENTIRELY CLEAR WHETHER THE ACTUAL ORDER FOR THE MOVE WAS GIVEN BY YOUR AGENCY OR BY THE FCDA. SUCH PROCEDURE LEAVES AN UNDESIRABLE UNCERTAINTY AS TO THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR ADMINISTRATION OF THE MOVE AND EVEN AS TO PROPER PROCEDURE FOR PAYMENT OF THE EXPENSES SO INCURRED.

SIMILAR LACK OF COORDINATION APPARENTLY EXISTED IN THE TIMING OF THE MOVEMENT, WHICH RESULTED IN THE PROPERTY BEING DELIVERED AT BATTLE CREEK BEFORE THE FCDA OFFICES THERE WERE READY FOR IT TO BE PLACED. CONSEQUENCE IT IS REPORTED THAT ADDITIONAL EXPENSE OF SOME $5,000 WAS INCURRED.

POSSIBLE ALSO AS A RESULT OF THE LACK OF DEFINITE FIXING OF AUTHORITY, IT APPEARS THAT THE GOVERNMENT'S CLAIM AGAINST THE MOVER FOR DAMAGES SUSTAINED BY THE PROPERTY IN THE MOVE WAS MATERIALLY PREJUDICED BY THE FAILURE TO INVENTORY THE PROPERTY AND ITS CONDITION AT THE TIME OF COMMENCEMENT OF THE MOVE. WE ARE NOT ADVISED AS TO WHETHER THE DAMAGE CLAIM HAS YET BEEN ADJUSTED OR WHETHER FINAL PAYMENT OF THE MOVER'S CHARGES HAS BEEN MADE. IF NOT, A SUFFICIENT AMOUNT SHOULD BE WITHHELD FROM THE MOVER TO COVER THE DAMAGES TO WHICH THE GOVERNMENT REASONABLY APPEARS TO BE ENTITLED, AND ANY RECLAIM BY THE MOVER REPORTED TO THIS OFFICE FOR SETTLEMENT.

A COPY OF THIS LETTER AND THE ENCLOSURE IS BEING TRANSMITTED TO THE FEDERAL CIVIL DEFENSE ADMINISTRATION.