B-128508, JUL. 30, 1956
Highlights
TO THE PENNSYLVANIA RAILROAD COMPANY: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER. THE RECORD INDICATES THAT THE NAILS WERE CONSIGNED TO THE FORMER UNITED STATES TREASURY PROCUREMENT DIVISION. YOUR BILL FOR $400.73 FREIGHT CHARGES WAS FIRST RECEIVED IN OUR OFFICE ON APRIL 13. WAS SUPPORTED BY A PHOTOSTATIC COPY OF A U.S. NO CERTIFICATION OF DELIVERY TO THE CONSIGNEE APPEARS ON THIS DOCUMENT SUCH AS IS REQUIRED UNDER THE TERMS OF THE GOVERNMENT BILL OF LADING. THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE HAS REPORTED THAT RECORDS OF SERVICES RENDERED IN THE TOLEDO MEDICAL DEPOT HAD BEEN DESTROYED AND THAT THEY WERE UNABLE TO VERIFY THAT THE MATERIAL WAS DELIVERED. THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE WAS NOT IN A POSITION TO ISSUE A CERTIFICATE IN LIEU OF LOST BILL OF LADING.
B-128508, JUL. 30, 1956
TO THE PENNSYLVANIA RAILROAD COMPANY:
REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER, PER FILE 7-14-JHP, REQUESTING A REVIEW OF THE SETTLEMENT WHICH DISALLOWED YOUR CLAIM ON BILL NO. 7-27 140920 FOR $400.73 ALLEGED TO BE DUE FOR THE TRANSPORTATION OF A SHIPMENT OF NAILS, WEIGHING 16,980 POUNDS, FROM GENEVA, UTAH, TO TOLEDO, OHIO, ON GOVERNMENT BILL OF LADING NO. TFP-28106 IN JULY 1945.
THE RECORD INDICATES THAT THE NAILS WERE CONSIGNED TO THE FORMER UNITED STATES TREASURY PROCUREMENT DIVISION, TOLEDO MEDICAL DEPOT, TOLEDO, OHIO, THIS FACILITY HAVING SINCE BEEN DEACTIVATED. YOUR BILL FOR $400.73 FREIGHT CHARGES WAS FIRST RECEIVED IN OUR OFFICE ON APRIL 13, 1955, AND WAS SUPPORTED BY A PHOTOSTATIC COPY OF A U.S. GOVERNMENT FREIGHT WAYBILL- ORIGINAL, STANDARD FORM NO. 1105. NO CERTIFICATION OF DELIVERY TO THE CONSIGNEE APPEARS ON THIS DOCUMENT SUCH AS IS REQUIRED UNDER THE TERMS OF THE GOVERNMENT BILL OF LADING. THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE HAS REPORTED THAT RECORDS OF SERVICES RENDERED IN THE TOLEDO MEDICAL DEPOT HAD BEEN DESTROYED AND THAT THEY WERE UNABLE TO VERIFY THAT THE MATERIAL WAS DELIVERED. FOR THAT REASON, THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE WAS NOT IN A POSITION TO ISSUE A CERTIFICATE IN LIEU OF LOST BILL OF LADING. SEE OUR GENERAL REGULATIONS NO. 97, REVISED, 25 COMP. GEN. 925. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES THEY DID NOT RECOMMEND YOUR VOUCHER FOR PAYMENT UPON SUBMISSION OF THE RECORD HERE. ACCORDINGLY, OUR TRANSPORTATION DIVISION DISALLOWED YOUR CLAIM.
YOU HAVE EXPLAINED IN YOUR REQUEST FOR REVIEW OF THE SETTLEMENT DISALLOWING YOUR CLAIM THAT SINCE THIS WAS A CARLOAD SHIPMENT DELIVERED ON A PRIVATE SIDING, NO DELIVERY RECEIPT WAS TAKEN, AND FOR THAT REASON, APPARENTLY, NO ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED TO SUPPORT YOUR CLAIM. IT MAY BE STATED, HOWEVER, THAT THE WEIGHT OF THE SHIPMENT--- 16,980 POUNDS--- IS SUCH THAT THE SHIPMENT IS PROPERLY A LESS THAN CARLOAD SHIPMENT UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 16 OF THE CONSOLIDATED FREIGHT CLASSIFICATION NO. 16.
THUS THE PRESENT STATE OF THE RECORD SHOWS THAT NEITHER YOU NOR THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE CAN FURNISH ANY RECORDS RELATIVE TO THE RECEIPT OF THE INVOLVED SHIPMENT BY THE CONSIGNEE AT DESTINATION. THE SERVICE ALLEGED WAS PERFORMED IN 1945 AND APPARENTLY YOUR BILL FOR CHARGES WAS NOT SUBMITTED UNTIL 1952, APPROXIMATELY SEVEN YEARS LATER. THE LAPSE OF TIME HAS MADE VERIFICATION OF AN ESSENTIAL FACT IMPOSSIBLE. AS PRESENTED, THE RECORD DOES NOT ESTABLISH BY COMPETENT EVIDENCE THE LIABILITY OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE PAYMENT OF THE CHARGES CLAIMED.
IN VIEW OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE DISALLOWANCE OF YOUR CLAIM BY OUR TRANSPORTATION DIVISION WAS PROPER, AND IS SUSTAINED.