Reginald Cutter-Temporary Quarters Subsistence

B-260765 Dec 14, 1995 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights A transferred employee who rented the house he eventually purchased is not entitled to temporary quarters subsistence expenses (TQSE) for the rental period. The record shows that the residence was offered to the employee for "rent or purchase". He did so as a precaution in the event he was unable to purchase the house. A transferred employee was given an advance of travel funds which included funds for TQSE. A transferred employee was erroneously authorized relocation expenses for his aunt and 22-year-old daughter. Was given an advance for those expenses. His indebtedness is subject to waiver. The case is remanded to the agency for computation of the debt that may be waived. Cutter's indebtedness for TQSE is not subject to waiver. View Decision Matter of: Reginald Cutter-Temporary Quarters Subsistence Expenses File: B-260765 Date: December 14, 1995 A transferred employee who rented the house he eventually purchased is not entitled to temporary quarters subsistence expenses (TQSE) for the rental period. The record shows that the residence was offered to the employee for "rent or purchase"; that the employee rented it pending arrangements to sell his old house and seek financing; and that, while the employee continued to look at other houses during the rental period, he did so as a precaution in the event he was unable to purchase the house. These facts support the agency's determination that the employee moved into the house with the intention of occupying it permanently. A transferred employee was given an advance of travel funds which included funds for TQSE. The employee became indebted for TQSE because he failed to meet the legal requirements for payment of those expenses, and not because of an erroneous authorization. Therefore, the advance for TQSE does not constitute an erroneous payment subject to waiver under 5 U.S.C. Sec. 5584 (1994). A transferred employee was erroneously authorized relocation expenses for his aunt and 22-year-old daughter, and was given an advance for those expenses. It appears that the employee spent the advance in reliance on the erroneous orders and, consequently, his indebtedness is subject to waiver. The case is remanded to the agency for computation of the debt that may be waived. DECISION Mr. Reginald Cutter, a civilian employee of the Department of the Army, appeals our Claims Group settlement, Z-2869511, Feb. 8, 1995. The settlement denied a portion of Mr. Cutter's temporary quarters subsistence expenses (TQSE), and disallowed relocation expenses for Mr. Cutter's aunt and 22-year-old daughter. We affirm our Claims Group's determination, and hold that Mr. Cutter's indebtedness for TQSE is not subject to waiver. However, since the employee spent funds advanced for his aunt's and daughter's relocation expenses in reliance on erroneous orders, his indebtedness for those expenses may be waived. BACKGROUND Mr. Cutter was authorized relocation expenses, including 60 days' temporary quarters subsistence expenses (TQSE), for his transfer from the Sacramento (California) Army Depot to a position with the Department of the Navy in Norfolk, Virginia. The travel orders authorizing relocation expenses for Mr. Cutter's family erroneously included his aunt and 22-year-old daughter. Upon arriving in Norfolk on July 27, 1993, Mr. Cutter and his family moved into a hotel. On August 18, 1993, the Cutters moved into a house at 200 Marsh Quay in Chesapeake, Virginia, and entered into a lease for a month-to-month rental ending on December 15. Mr. Cutter states that: "The property known as 200 Marsh Quay was available for rent or purchase. The property was accepted for rent or purchase, contingent on the sale of property in Sacramento and securing financing, Aug. 93. We accepted the offer of renting, but did not accept household goods because there was no guarantee of our California property being sold immediately, and being able to secure financing for purchase in Virginia . . . " [Emphasis added.] Mr. Cutter states that he rented furniture for the house and continued to keep his household goods in storage. He further states that the house was never taken off the market, and that twice during the rental period he was given 30-day notices to vacate the house because other parties had expressed interest in buying it. Also, Mr. Cutter states that he and his family continued to look at other houses during the rental period. A letter from Mr. Cutter's realtor states that he continued to show the Cutter's other houses from August to December 1993, "in case our contingency contract fell through on 200 Marsh Quay." On October 20, 1993, the agency extended Mr. Cutter's TQSE eligibility for another 60 days. On November 1, 1993, Mr. Cutter signed a contract for the purchase of the Marsh Quay house, which was contingent on the sale of his old residence and his ability to secure financing.