B-166371, APR. 1, 1969
Highlights
FORESMAN AND COMPANY: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF FEBRUARY 24. THE ABOVE MENTIONED PURCHASE ORDER WAS ISSUED ON APRIL 15. IT IS YOUR CONTENTION THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED NO PAYMENT FOR ITEMS 22 AND 23. EXCEPT FOR ITEMS 22 AND 23 AND THERE IS NO RECORD OF RECEIPT OR ACCEPTANCE OF THESE ITEMS. THAT THE ACCOUNTING OFFICERS OF THE GOVERNMENT HAVE THE RIGHT AND THE DUTY TO SCRUTINIZE CLAIMS AND ACCOUNTS WITH GREAT CARE AND TO REJECT ALL CLAIMS CONCERNING WHICH SUBSTANTIAL DOUBTS EXIST. THE BURDEN IS ON CLAIMANTS TO FURNISH EVIDENCE CLEARLY AND SATISFACTORILY PROVING THE VALIDITY OF THEIR CLAIMS. 31 COMP. THE RISK OF LOSS IN SHIPMENT REMAINED WITH YOU AND ACTUAL DELIVERY WAS REQUIRED TO OBLIGATE THE GOVERNMENT.
B-166371, APR. 1, 1969
TO SCOTT, FORESMAN AND COMPANY:
REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF FEBRUARY 24, 1969, REQUESTING REVIEW OF THE SETTLEMENT BY OUR CLAIMS DIVISION DATED JANUARY 29, 1969, WHICH DISALLOWED YOUR CLAIM FOR $280.77, ALLEGED TO BE DUE IN PAYMENT FOR ITEMS 22 AND 23 (ACCOUNT NO. 4-52866, INVOICE NOS. 46412B AND 87339 DATED JUNE 4 AND AUGUST 11, 1964, RESPECTIVELY) UNDER DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY PURCHASE ORDER NO. NSCO-4 61470.
THE ABOVE MENTIONED PURCHASE ORDER WAS ISSUED ON APRIL 15, 1964, BY THE NAVAL SUPPLY CENTER, OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA, FOR SPECIFIED QUANTITIES OF 24 PUBLICATIONS, ITEMS 1-24, TO BE DELIVERED F.O.B. DESTINATION WITHIN 45 DAYS AFTER RECEIPT OF THE ORDER, VIA PARCEL POST, C/O FPO SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA, TO THE U.S. NAVAL SUPPLY DEPOT, YOKOSUKA, JAPAN. IT IS YOUR CONTENTION THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED NO PAYMENT FOR ITEMS 22 AND 23.
ACCORDING TO THE RECORD PAYMENT HAS BEEN MADE FOR ALL ITEMS, EXCEPT FOR ITEMS 22 AND 23 AND THERE IS NO RECORD OF RECEIPT OR ACCEPTANCE OF THESE ITEMS.
THE COURT OF CLAIMS HELD, AT AN EARLY DATE, IN LONGWILL V UNITED STATES, 17 CT.CL. 288, 291, AND IN CHARLES V UNITED STATES, 19 CT.CL. 316, 319, THAT THE ACCOUNTING OFFICERS OF THE GOVERNMENT HAVE THE RIGHT AND THE DUTY TO SCRUTINIZE CLAIMS AND ACCOUNTS WITH GREAT CARE AND TO REJECT ALL CLAIMS CONCERNING WHICH SUBSTANTIAL DOUBTS EXIST. THE BURDEN IS ON CLAIMANTS TO FURNISH EVIDENCE CLEARLY AND SATISFACTORILY PROVING THE VALIDITY OF THEIR CLAIMS. 31 COMP. GEN. 340; 18 COMP. GEN. 980. IN THE PRESENT CASE THE INVOICES SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF YOUR CLAIM MIGHT BE CONSIDERED EVIDENCE OF THE FACT THAT YOU SHIPPED THE ITEMS IN QUESTION. HOWEVER, UNDER THE TERMS OF THE PURCHASE ORDER, WHICH CALLED FOR DELIVERY F.O.B. DESTINATION, THE RISK OF LOSS IN SHIPMENT REMAINED WITH YOU AND ACTUAL DELIVERY WAS REQUIRED TO OBLIGATE THE GOVERNMENT. YOUR LETTER DATED MAY 3, 1965, TO THE NAVAL SUPPLY CENTER, INDICATES THAT YOU WERE ON NOTICE AT THAT TIME OF NON DELIVERY OF THE ITEMS IN QUESTION, BUT IT DOES NOT APPEAR THAT ANY ACTION WAS EVER TAKEN BY YOU THEREAFTER WITH RESPECT THERETO, AND THE NAVY HAS NO RECORDS TO SHOW THAT THE ITEMS WERE EVER RECEIVED.
IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES WE MUST SUSTAIN THE SETTLEMENT OF JANUARY 29, 1969.