Swiftmode Forwarding Company

B-261108 May 02, 1996 Jump To VIEW DECISION RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights Carrier is liable for lost items when the carrier has failed to establish that they were not tendered. Items were listed on the original inventory and not identified as missing on the rider at the time the carrier received the goods. Although member was unable to identify the items by number at the time of delivery. Carrier's refund claim is denied. Two missing items are at issue in this case. A dining room table and a futon mattress. [1] Both were identified by the shipper as missing at the time of delivery. The member's wife noted on the DD Form 1840 (Joint Statement of Loss or Damage at Delivery) that a dining room table and accompanying leaf were missing from the shipment of household goods. View Decision Matter of: Swiftmode Forwarding Company File: B-261108 Date: May 2, 1996 Once the shipper has established a prima facie case, carrier is liable for lost items when the carrier has failed to establish that they were not tendered. Items were listed on the original inventory and not identified as missing on the rider at the time the carrier received the goods. Although member was unable to identify the items by number at the time of delivery, member gave timely notice of missing items. Carrier's refund claim is denied. DECISION Swiftmode Forwarding Company, Inc., through its agent, National Claims Services, requests review of our Claims Settlement Certificate Z-2862336.7, Mar. 23, 1995, denying it a refund of $444.00 set off by the Army from funds due Swiftmode for loss and damage to the household goods of an Army member, John D. Stephens. We affirm the Settlement Certificate. Swiftmode picked up the shipment of the member's household goods from nontemporary storage in Oakland, California, and delivered it to Fort Stewart, Georgia, on January 31, 1992. Two missing items are at issue in this case, a dining room table and a futon mattress. [1] Both were identified by the shipper as missing at the time of delivery. At the time of delivery, the member's wife noted on the DD Form 1840 (Joint Statement of Loss or Damage at Delivery) that a dining room table and accompanying leaf were missing from the shipment of household goods. The words "not on inventory" are found on the Form 1840, next to the listing of the dining room table. However, the member subsequently filed a timely DD Form 1840R (Notice of Loss or Damage) indicating that item 23 on the inventory was in fact the dining room table which had not been delivered. The record shows that the dining room table was tendered to the storage company. The original inventory lists the dining room table and leaf as inventory item Nos. 22 and 23. It also lists a small round table as inventory item No. 37 and an oval table as No. 56. Thus, three tables were tendered to the storage company. At the time Swiftmode picked up the household goods from nontemporary storage, Swiftmode inventoried the shipment and a rider or exception sheet was prepared. The rider is used to note shortages, overages, damages, and other discrepancies between what is written on the inventory and what the carrier receives when he picks up the shipment. Swiftmode's rider states that "GOODS WERE RECEIVED AS NOTED ON INVENTORY EXCEPT AS FOLLOWS." A number of items are listed on the rider, including two tables. Item No. 56, the oval table, is listed with specific damage in excess of the damage described on the inventory. Another table, with no inventory number, is described as an end table, also with more damage than that which is listed on the inventory. It is tentatively identified as "maybe #23." Swiftmode argues that since the table identified as "maybe #23" was clearly an end table, and since no dining room table is listed on the rider, the dining room table was not tendered. We are not persuaded by this argument. The fact that the unnumbered table was identified by Swiftmode as "maybe #23," does not establish the fact that the dining room table and leaf were missing when Swiftmode picked up the shipment. Clearly, two small tables were tendered to Swiftmode and were identified on the rider with preexisting damage. However, there is a third table that was tendered to Swiftmode, namely the dining room table and leaf, which, if missing at the time Swiftmode picked up the shipment, should have been listed on the rider as missing. Thus, we find that the table and leaf were tendered to Swiftmode. At the time of delivery, the member also listed a queen-size futon mattress and cover as missing. On the DD Form 1840R the futon is listed as item "41?" Swiftmode states that inventory item No. 41 was a four by six carton which holds full-sized king and queen-sized mattresses which was not missing at the time of delivery. Swiftmode claims that the futon mattress was another item not listed on the inventory and therefore never tendered from the storage facility.