There are clearly many unresolved issues between shipping lines and forwarding agents when it comes
to liability for supplying vital information.
This is apparent from the barrage of responses, some of which are published here, to a reader query regarding Shipped on Board (SOB) information.
Lines and agents
debate SOB story
Who pays if the line doesn’t supply the details?
CLEARING AND forwarding agent Afrilogix was recently left in the lurch by a shipping line using an indemnity clause in the bill of lading to avoid taking responsibility for not supplying SOB information.
“We requested SOB details from the line, but when the shipment arrived the line neglected to give us the information. They told us they had left a message on our voice mail but no one had followed up and as a result the shipment sat in the harbour for a whole month before the manager phoned to tell us it had arrived.
“When they gave us the info we realised we had been requesting it all along.
“They then insisted that we could have passed customs documents, but this was not the case because transhipment vessels were involved and because of Customs’ new EDI system, my entry would not have been accepted because the vessel was incorrect,” managing director Nisa Dawood told FTW.
“The line told me to pay all the charges and said they would decide whether or not to credit me for their mistake.
“My question is, if customs requires SOB details and if the shipping line has an indemnity clause in its bill of lading, who takes responsibility for the SOB details not being supplied when requests are ignored since you can’t pass a customs entry without SOB details?
“Normally clearing and forwarding agents pay demurrage for a few days or a week, but in this case it comes to over R100 000 for storage and demurrage alone.
“The shipping line says they indemnify themselves from problems like these, but if it’s a customs requirement to provide SOB details, what happens if the line doesn’t supply them?”
‘Lines are encroaching on forwarders’ territory’
If you ever have perused the rear end of a bill of lading it is quite evident that as a forwarder there is not one single clause that gives you any advantage in any dispute, even if the line is at fault. Some accept liability and give you a reduction, but not always the full amount.
Have any forwarders noticed how many shipping lines have all of a sudden come up with “logistics”? We are all aware which shipping lines have their own logistics and clearing departments. Although they maintain they are not in the clearing game, this is not the truth.
This would explain why as a forwarder we have no legal footing as shipping lines with their own in-house clearing departments have all the advantages and selling tools available to them. How much business has been lost by forwarders due to shipping line incompetence?
Getting back to the SOB details. My conclusion on transhipment is that the line is obliged to provide this detail. If we all accept the legal problem and do nothing then the problem will remain. Perhaps the time has come to make the lines revise their bill clauses and include some that are favourable to us. This would put liability onto them, to provide a service that we and customers expect to be delivered all the time, not half of the time.
Joe Soap
‘SOB details are always a contentious issue’ - carrier
I have read with interest the article regarding SOB details and offer my personal view on the matter.
SOB details are always a contentious issue between the lines and the clearing industry as a delay in taking release (clearing) of cargo from the lines will almost always result in detention (overstay) charges being raised by the line. This affects the clearing agent’s profit margin for the shipment as the consignee in most cases will refuse to pay these charges, because he has employed the services of the clearing agent to ensure the cargo is cleared in good time to avoid any additional charges.
It is my understanding that in terms of the standard contract of carriage it is the duty of the line to deliver the cargo from the load port to the discharge port, and there is no clause stating the line must notify the consignee or their agent of the arrival of the cargo.
Accordingly the onus of ensuring the cargo is cleared through customs and release obtained from the Line in good time to avoid any additional charges will always lie with the consignee or their appointed agent.
As the shipper, in most cases, will send copy documents or original documents of the shipment to the consignee shortly after the vessel has sailed from the load port, the consignee will therefore be aware of the shipment before the line’s representative at the discharge port.
This in theory should give the consignee or their agent sufficient time to contact the line representative confirming the arrival of the vessel carrying the cargo to the port of delivery in terms of the contract of carriage, and to process all documentation through customs, so the consignee can take delivery of their cargo from the line.
Brad Gower, commercial manager - imports, MSC Cape Town.
‘Time for lines to pay up’
Forwarding agents are always having to pay for the mistakes of others. Many times the shipping lines “forget” conveniently to notify us of something and the agent has to pay for their mistakes, like in this case. I say the time has come for lines to pay for their mistakes as we have been losing a lot of money because of them, even in our exports department.
Ian Erasmus, Ršhlig Grindrod
‘Take it up with SARS’
I advise the forwarder to take this issue up with the SARS customs legislator department and also get Saaff involved. I had a similar problem with South African Airways and was successful. SARS could impose a penalty on the line for failure to supply SOB information.
Forwarder
