BNUMBER: B-261308
DATE: November 9, 1995
TITLE: Allied Intermodel Forwarding, Inc.-Claim for
Reimbursement of Amounts Collected by Setoff for Loss of
Household Goods
**********************************************************************
Matter of:Allied Intermodel Forwarding, Inc.-Claim for Reimbursement
of Amounts Collected by Setoff for Loss of Household Goods
File: B-261308
Date: November 9, 1995
DIGEST
When a case of prima facie liability has been established with regard
to a shipment of household goods, the carrier is liable unless he
presents sufficient evidence to rebut the liability.
DECISION
This is in response to an appeal of a Claims Group settlement which
denied the claim of Resource Protection on behalf of Allied Intermodel
Forwarding, Inc., (Allied) for reimbursement of amounts collected by
setoff for loss of items in a shipment of household goods. We affirm
the Claims Group's settlement.
The household goods of Sergeant First Class James D. Dominick, USA
(Retired), were picked up in Tacoma, Washington, on March 4, 1992, and
were delivered to Port Huron, Michigan, on May 21, 1992. Form 1840,
completed at delivery, indicates that a lawn mower, 2 trash cans, and
10 mini-blinds were missing. The shipper later discovered that many
items from other boxes were missing, including the entire contents of
some boxes. The missing items were listed on form 1840R along with
other items which were damaged. The Army made a demand on Allied in
the amount of $5,680, which was later reduced to $5,476. The latter
amount was collected from Allied by setoff. Resource Protection now
claims $4,043.28 of that amount on behalf of Allied.
In an unrelated transaction Sergeant Dominick put some of his
household goods into storage in July 1993, with the same company which
had handled them before. Personnel there observed that the stored
items included a lawn mower, mini-blinds, and cartons with the same
numbers as those on form 1840R Sergeant Dominick completed earlier.
Resource Protection argues that this information rebuts Allied's prima
facie liability for the missing items.
While Resource Protection argues that the items listed on form 1840R
are cartons, the items listed on the form are specific items or groups
of items found in the cartons. For example, in inventory item number
25 there were 25 nutcrackers which were lost. Inventory item number
195, which is listed as containing tools, appears three times because
three tools packed in it were lost. The fact that the boxes were
reused is not evidence that the items packed in them during the
military move were not lost during the military move. Regarding the
lawn mower and mini-blinds, the carrier's agent signed form 1840
indicating that the items were missing at delivery, and Resource
Protection has presented no evidence that the lawn mower and
mini-blinds stored were the same ones Sergeant Dominick tendered to
Allied in 1992. In this regard, the shipper reported that he had
acquired another lawn mower that was placed in storage. Similarly,
the shipper reported he had many sets of mini-blinds and that his
claim involved those which had been lost.
A prima facie case of carrier liability is established by a showing of
tender of goods to the carrier, delivery in a more damaged condition,
and the amount of damages. Missouri Pacific Railroad Co. v. Elmore &
Stahl, 377 U.S. 134 (1964). In the present situation prima facie
liability has been established, and Resource Protection has not
presented evidence to rebut that liability. Paul Arpin Van Lines,
Inc., B-213784, May 22, 1984.
Since Resource Protection has not rebutted Allied's prima facie
liability, we deny its reimbursement claim and affirm the Claims
Group's settlement.
/s/Seymour Efros
for Robert P. Murphy
General Counsel