BNUMBER:  B-265971
DATE:  January 25, 1996
TITLE:  [Letter]

**********************************************************************

B-265971

January 25, 1996

Mr. Robert D. Walker
Claims Adjuster
American Van Services, Inc.
P.O. Box 2317
Fort Walton Beach, FL  32549

Dear Mr. Walker:

This is in response to your August 21, 1995, letter appealing 
settlement Z-2862118-66 dated August 14, 1995, of our Claims Group 
regarding the shipment of household goods of Francis Bruno under GBL 
SP-197-332 and the resulting damage to the goods.

A chair (Inventory 115) sustained a damaged right arm for which you 
concede liability for the $175 repair cost, but you object to a total 
refinishing of the chair at an additional cost of $100 since there was 
preexisting damage which will also be repaired during the refinishing.  
We find it reasonable that following the repair of the arm, the chair 
would have to be refinished so that the newly repaired arm matches the 
rest of the chair.  The fact that some preexisting damage may be 
repaired incidental to the repair of transit damage does not diminish 
the carrier's liability where the carrier has not demonstrated that 
the additional cost for doing so is ascertainable.  American Van 
Services, Inc., B-256229, Sept. 8, 1994.  No such showing has been 
made here.

An artificial flower arrangement (Inventory 161) was crushed and the 
owner obtained a detailed estimate of $150 for replacement, listing 
the specific flowers to be used in the arrangement, which you dispute 
may not reflect the original arrangement's composition or that it 
could not be repaired.  You have submitted no evidence beyond your 
allegation to support your claim.  You did not avail yourself of your 
right to inspect the damaged arrangement, which might have yielded 
evidence to support your argument.  No refund is due for this item.

A glass picture frame (Inventory 28) was shattered and the replacement 
cost was $30 which you contend is excessive for simply replacing a 
piece of 18" by 12" glass.  However, on the DD Form 1844, the member 
also noted that the picture contained in the frame could not be found.  
Therefore, the value of the entire picture was considered in the 
replacement cost.  No refund is due.

Four unframed posters (Inventory 82) were torn and wrinkled and valued 
at $30 each replacement value.  You argue that there was no proof that 
the wrinkles and tears were severe enough to warrant replacement and 
challenge the replacement value since it appears that the original 
acquisition cost on the member's analysis chart was altered from $20 
to $30.  We find that when inexpensive unframed posters are torn or 
wrinkled, replacement rather than repair is reasonable.  Regarding the 
change in the acquisition price, we do not know why such a change was 
made.  However, the member signed the form acknowledging the penalties 
for filing a false claim and since you have submitted no evidence that 
the value was wrong, no refund is due.

Sincerely yours,

/s/Seymour Efros
for Robert P. Murphy
General Counsel

B-265971
January 25, 1996

DIGEST
When repairing damage to household goods (refinishing chair) caused by 
carrier, the fact that preexisting damage may also be repaired, where 
cost of repairing such damage is not ascertainable, is not 
objectionable.  Also, where carrier disputes amount of repair 
estimates but offers no evidence other than allegations, carrier has 
not carried its burden of proof.