ITIC urges shipbrokers to check internal communications systems

International Transport Intermediaries Club (ITIC) says communication failings within shipbrokers’ organisations can result in important instructions from principals being overlooked, leading to potentially costly claims.

In the most recent issue of its Claims Review, ITIC cites an incident in which an off-duty member of a tanker broker’s operations staff received an individual phone and email message over the weekend from a colleague in a different office, asking for important instructions regarding the amount of cargo to be loaded to be passed on to a tanker owner. The operations person took no action, having wrongly assumed that the message had also been sent to the company’s general operations email address and that it would be dealt with by an on-duty colleague.

The message detailed a request by the charterer to change the discharge port rotation to avoid severe congestion at what was originally scheduled to be the first port of call. This revised rotation required a reduction in the vessel’s draft to enable it to discharge at what was now intended to be the first port of call. Because of the failure to pass on the message, however, the wrong quantity of cargo was loaded and there was no option but to remain with the original rotation. A significant amount of demurrage was subsequently incurred, which was passed on to the broker and ultimately reimbursed by ITIC.

ITIC says a large number of claims caused by messages not being forwarded involve communications between different offices of the same broking company. It urges brokers to ensure that they have systems in place to prevent such errors occurring in their business.

ITIC is managed by Thomas Miller. More details about the club and the services it offers can be found on ITIC’s website at www.itic-insure.com



For more information:
Charlotte Kirk
ITIC
Tel. +44 (0)20 7338 0150
Fax. +44 (0)20 7338 0151
charlotte.kirk@thomasmiller.com

Ship agents count the cost of avoidable errors

International Transport Intermediaries Club (ITIC) has emphasised how avoidable errors can prove expensive for ship agents.

In the latest issue of its Claims Review, ITIC recounts how a ship agent at a tidal port in Japan was asked to provide a tide table to enable the owner of a ship to calculate the permissible drafts for the dates that its ship was due to berth at the port. The ship agent duly scanned the tide table and sent it electronically to the owner. The ship arrived at the port with a draft of 8.56 m, but was informed by the port authorities that the permissible draft was only 7.8 m.

It emerged that the agent had inadvertently sent the owner the tide table for 2012 instead of 2011. The two tide tables were kept together in the same file and, during the scanning process, the corner of the tide table had folded over, thereby obscuring the year. The excess draft meant that the ship could only discharge for about four hours in the morning and two hours in the afternoon. The ship had to shift anchorage three times during the four days it took to discharge, which was twice as long as it should have taken.

The owner claimed the pilotage and towage costs involved in shifting to the anchorage three times, plus two days’ hire, additional bunker consumption, and additional stevedoring, for a total of $143,000. It was agreed by the owner that some of the costs would have been incurred in any event, and the claim for additional costs was settled at $120,000.

In another case reported by ITIC, shipowners appointed a port agent for a bunker call by their vessel. The agent failed to complete the required customs formalities in time to book the berth, a mistake which went unnoticed until the vessel was approaching the port. After being notified by the agent of the mistake, the shipowner decided to divert the vessel to another port around 500 km north of the original port as the bunker berth at the first port was not due to become free for another five days. The ship agent also operated within the second port and the bunkering proceeded without incident.

When the time came to settle invoices totalling $26,000 from the various service providers in the second port, the owners refused to pay, claiming that these additional costs had been incurred as a result of not being able to call at the original port. The costs were in fact the normal charges relating to bunker calls, such as tugs, security charges and pilotage, and would have been payable by the owners in any event, even if the vessel had been able to call at the original port. However, the vessel had been delayed by two days and it had incurred estimated costs that exceeded this amount for fuel and other services, as a result of having to travel 500 km to the second port.

Rather than enter into a dispute with the owners, the ship agent paid the port costs for the bunker call, and was reimbursed by ITIC. www.itic-insure.com

Copies of the ITIC Claims Review can be requested from: chris@merlinco.com

ITIC is managed by Thomas Miller. More details about the club and the services it offers can be found on ITIC’s website at www.itic-insure.com.

For more information:                             

Charlotte Kirk                                              

ITIC                                                               

Tel. +44 (0)20 7338 0150                          

Fax. +44 (0)20 7338 0151                         

charlotte.kirk@thomasmiller.com