OPINION ISSUED JULY 10, 1987
MOORE BUSINESS FORMS
& SYSTEMS DIVISION
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE & ADMINISTRATION
James Ruziska, Sales Representative, appeared for claimant.
Robert D. Pollitt, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.
Claimants company seeks $437.82 for freight charges from the
freight, and the restocking charge for paper products ordered by
respondent. There was
some confusion concerning this particular order, and this expense
resulted from same.
The purchase order, dated October 2, 1984, stated a request for
8 1/2 x 11
one-part computer forms of green tinted paper for respondent. There
a typographical error
on the purchase order as respondent intended to order only 160,000
forms. A credit of $1,800
was issued to respondent to cover the error. Claimant company
the number of forms
indicated on the purchase order; however, the paper was white
paper rather than the
requested green-tinted paper. To rectify this additional problem,
respondent agreed to keep the
excess paper and sell it to other agencies. The freight company was
supposed to pick up
160,000 forms, but picked up all 499,200 instead. Respondent admits
liability in the amount of
$176.18 for the original freight on the mistaken order of 499,200
Ms. Helen Kay Wilson, Manager of Administrative Services for
respondent, testified that there
was a typographical error made in the State contract order for this
claim. She confirmed that the
company picked up the entire 499,200 sheets of paper. She stated
respondent would not
have incurred the restocking and return freight charges, but for
mistake of claimant company.
Virginia Shelton, Procurement Officer for respondent, testified
she made the arrangements
to sell the 399,000 sheets to other agencies. She stated that she
not prepare the bill of lading
for the freight company in this instance. The bill of lading
the amounts of paper to be
picked up by the freight company.
There was no explanation as to whether the claimant issued the
the freight company
for the bill of lading. Claimant's sales representative, James
has no knowledge whether
claimant's factory prepared the bill of lading or whether it was
prepared by Overnight, the freight
The evidence in this claim is unclear as to the origin of the
which party was
responsible for same. There being no proof that the claimant made
error, the Court grants an
award to the claimant company in the amount of $176.18.
Award of $176.18.