%PDF-1.6
%
1 0 obj
<>
endobj
2 0 obj
<>stream
2021-06-11T15:37:34-04:00
2021-06-11T15:37:34-04:00
2021-06-11T15:37:34-04:00
Adobe Acrobat 17.0
application/pdf
97021808
uuid:3eee3054-7dfa-40a1-8de8-0a1d67a9abb7
uuid:6ad6b919-1542-4e9c-b18d-57ef6778efe2
Acrobat Web Capture 15.0
endstream
endobj
5 0 obj
<>
endobj
6 0 obj
<>
endobj
3 0 obj
<>
endobj
7 0 obj
<>
endobj
8 0 obj
<>
endobj
17 0 obj
<>>>
endobj
18 0 obj
<>
endobj
19 0 obj
<>
endobj
21 0 obj
[20 0 R 20 0 R]
endobj
22 0 obj
[20 0 R 20 0 R]
endobj
23 0 obj
[20 0 R 20 0 R]
endobj
24 0 obj
[20 0 R 20 0 R]
endobj
20 0 obj
<><><><><><>]/P 18 0 R/Pg 13 0 R/S/Article>>
endobj
13 0 obj
<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text]>>/StructParents 0/Type/Page>>
endobj
25 0 obj
[31 0 R 32 0 R]
endobj
26 0 obj
<>stream
BT
/Artifact <>BDC
/TT0 1 Tf
9 0 0 9 5 779 Tm
(97021808)Tj
EMC
/Artifact <>BDC
0 -86 TD
(file:///usr.osd.mil/)Tj
7.166 0 Td
(...)Tj
(r/Desktop/DOHA%20transfer/DOHA-Kane/dodogc/doha/claims/transportation/Ar\
chived%20-%20HTML/97021808.html)Tj
49.712 0 Td
([6/11/2021 3:37:34 PM])Tj
EMC
ET
1 g
10 36 591.75 729.75 re
f
0.604 g
q 1 0 0 1 16.0002 759.7503 cm
0 0 m
0.75 -0.751 l
579 -0.751 l
579.749 0 l
h
f
Q
0.933 g
q 1 0 0 1 16.7499 758.9997 cm
0 0 m
-0.75 -0.75 l
579 -0.75 l
578.25 0 l
h
f
Q
0.604 g
q 1 0 0 1 16.0002 758.25 cm
0 0 m
0.75 0.75 l
0 1.5 l
h
f
Q
0.933 g
q 1 0 0 1 594.9999 758.9997 cm
0 0 m
0.75 -0.75 l
0.75 0.751 l
h
f
Q
/Article <>BDC
EMC
/Article <>BDC
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 16 741.75 Tm
(In Re:)Tj
0 -2.125 TD
(American International Moving, Corp.)Tj
T*
(Claimant)Tj
T*
(DATE: June 25, 1997)Tj
T*
(Claims Case No. 97021808)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
15.224 -2.125 Td
(CLAIMS APPEALS BOARD DECISION)Tj
-15.224 -2.125 Td
(DIGEST)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
T*
(1. Consistent with the policy established by the Comptroller General, ou\
r Office will not question an )Tj
40.492 0 Td
(agency's)Tj
-40.492 -1.125 Td
(calculation of the value of damages to items in a shipment of household \
goods unless the )Tj
35.826 0 Td
(carrier demonstrates by clear)Tj
-35.826 -1.125 Td
(and convincing evidence that the agency's determination was )Tj
24.671 0 Td
(unreasonable.)Tj
-24.671 -2.125 Td
(2. The fact that some pre-existing damage may be repaired incidental to \
the repair of transit damage )Tj
40.206 0 Td
(does not diminish a)Tj
-40.206 -1.125 Td
(carrier's liability where the carrier has not demonstrated that the addi\
tional cost )Tj
31.891 0 Td
(for doing so is ascertainable.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
-31.891 -2.125 Td
(DECISION)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
0 -2.375 TD
(American International Moving Corporation \(American\), appeals the Sett\
lement)Tj
0 0 0.933 rg
9.75 0 0 9.75 401.875 447.75 Tm
(\(1\))Tj
ET
0 0 0.933 RG
0.75 w
q 1 0 0 1 401.875 447 cm
0 0 m
11.369 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 413.2437 443.25 Tm
( of the Defense )Tj
(Office of Hearings)Tj
-33.104 -1.125 Td
(and Appeals with respect to the firm's claim to recover $676.08 of the $\
1,779.21 )Tj
32.422 0 Td
(initially offset by the Air Force for)Tj
-32.422 -1.125 Td
(transit loss or damage that American caused to the household )Tj
24.771 0 Td
(goods of a service member. )Tj
11.274 0 Td
(The Settlement allowed $295)Tj
-36.045 -1.125 Td
(which the Air Force reconsidered in its )Tj
15.856 0 Td
(administrative report.)Tj
/TT1 1 Tf
5.66 -2.125 Td
(Background)Tj
/TT0 1 Tf
-21.517 -2.125 Td
(The record shows that the shipment was picked up in Pratville, Alabama o\
n June 3, 1992, and it was )Tj
40.38 0 Td
(delivered at)Tj
-40.38 -1.375 Td
(Mountain Home, Idaho, on August 10, 1992.)Tj
0 0 0.933 rg
9.75 0 0 9.75 231.9824 339.75 Tm
(\(2\))Tj
ET
q 1 0 0 1 231.9824 339 cm
0 0 m
11.369 0 l
h
S
Q
BT
0 g
12 0 0 12 243.3511 335.25 Tm
( American still disputes its liability or )Tj
15.359 0 Td
(the amount of liability for each of)Tj
-34.305 -1.125 Td
(several items. )Tj
5.748 0 Td
(By Descriptive Inventory number, the following )Tj
19.579 0 Td
(items are still disputed for the reasons indicated:)Tj
-25.327 -2.125 Td
(American disputes the amount of its liability due to the damage it cause\
d to the eagle on top of a flag )Tj
40.627 0 Td
(pole \(Item 242\).)Tj
-40.627 -1.125 Td
(American contends that it was improper to charge it replacement cost \($\
14.10\) for )Tj
33.1 0 Td
(the flag pole because the pole itself)Tj
-33.1 -1.125 Td
(still functions without the smashed eagle. )Tj
16.803 0 Td
(It offered $5.)Tj
-16.803 -2.125 Td
(The firm disputes the application of depreciated replacement cost for a \
silk dress that was damaged )Tj
39.93 0 Td
(in transit \(Item 168\).)Tj
-39.93 -1.125 Td
(The owner purchased the dress in 1979, and claims an )Tj
21.91 0 Td
(undepreciated )Tj
5.858 0 Td
(replacement cost was $128 based on the cost of a)Tj
-27.768 -1.125 Td
(similar new dress in a catalog. )Tj
12.357 0 Td
(After depreciating )Tj
7.552 0 Td
(this amount by 75 percent, $32 was offset. )Tj
17.219 0 Td
(American complains that)Tj
-37.128 -1.125 Td
(the Air Force did not provide )Tj
11.942 0 Td
(the brand name and model of the dress on the List of Property and Claims\
Analysis Chart)Tj
-11.942 -1.125 Td
(\(Air Force )Tj
(Form 180\); therefore, damages should be limited to 25 percent \($25\) o\
f the original purchase price )Tj
44.125 0 Td
(\($100\).)Tj
-44.125 -2.125 Td
(With regard to the five piece set of china, American delivered the large\
platter in a broken condition. )Tj
40.539 0 Td
(The service)Tj
-40.539 -1.125 Td
(member claims depreciated replacement cost of $65. )Tj
21.324 0 Td
(American contends that the )Tj
11.218 0 Td
(depreciated replacement cost should be)Tj
-32.542 -1.125 Td
($50 because neither the Air Force nor the service member )Tj
23.435 0 Td
(provided the manufacturer and model number of the china.)Tj
-23.435 -2.125 Td
(The carrier delivered a lamp with a broken shade \(Item 131\). )Tj
24.601 0 Td
(Because it was less than six months )Tj
14.526 0 Td
(old, the Air Force did)Tj
-39.126 -1.125 Td
(not adjudicate depreciation. )Tj
11.329 0 Td
(The Air Force found that due to the design of the )Tj
19.856 0 Td
(lamp, the shade was not replaceable;)Tj
-31.185 -1.125 Td
(therefore, American was charged with the replacement cost of )Tj
25.1 0 Td
(the lamp \($39.99\). )Tj
7.637 0 Td
(American contends that neither the)Tj
-32.737 -1.125 Td
(Air Force nor the owner demonstrated that )Tj
17.3 0 Td
(the shade was unreplaceable.)Tj
-17.3 -2.125 Td
(American argues that it was not liable for any of the damage on the rema\
ining items in dispute. )Tj
38.294 0 Td
(It )Tj
(contends that the)Tj
ET
EMC
endstream
endobj
27 0 obj
<>
endobj
28 0 obj
(H]ipazDg9!)
endobj
29 0 obj
<>
endobj
30 0 obj
<>
endobj
35 0 obj
<>
endobj
36 0 obj
<>stream
H\j0~
COkgXr t1NzϊJ3$%CrTVvD~5NvxvV$)NO}Dyl;<#lalE
^aUks?أ m8qM-iʄn7!/svNXFGh0
a>qڥߍyJq&8eN[X2K9#3K|$>1A8#G$$;HrPYq1ja7En=y*vSM[>d|WFwe\0Q҇3ZzI],>^,į W.
endstream
endobj
37 0 obj
<>stream
H|y\TG5o^p fQѬ,d57F(CEPT#^(xⅨx}̈+ʸjM20=bߧ~ !g-ZN-,V!Q1Im'gPP/;ft!+}AIm
aP> Ԯ@qѱB(,~@bNJc|>n8<&Zv7
ȱ ]RFT
0N;s_x\nި 4LC&ScK!R/i*͐fIYKKn!.31R~ƍ٩K; *rI)]J_RPJEy@mw5QMSi,unR{"D=U":u
6yjx@xg<\`.4;7Lv#ٝ1j:T