REDELIVERY BUNKER AND BUNKER OVERCONSUMPTION

JASON

DEAR MR YANG

GD DAY

WE CHARTED ONE VSL TCT BSS. WE BUNKERED THE VSL AT SINGAPORE AS PER MASTER'S REQUEST BUNKER ABT 700MT BSS DISPORT QINGDAO. CONSIDERING THE VSL MAY CALL NORTH CHINA PORT, WE SUPPLIED ABT 30MT MORE. AFTER ARRIVAL FINAL DISPORT TIANJIN, THE VSL OVERCONSUMPTED ABT 50MT IFO AT SEA. BUT THE VSL ENCOUNTED TYPHOON DURING THE PASSAGE FM SINGAPORE TO TIANJIN. SO THE REDEL BUNKER WAS LESS ABT 50MT THAN THE C/P BOR. THE OWNERS CALIMS THAT THE BOR IS NOT SUFFICIENT AND THE CHARTRS TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE UNSUFFICIENT BOR.

PLEASED TO HEAR YR COMMENTS.

THKS

BRGDS
JASON

admin

DEAR JASON,

IT DEPENDS ON THE BUNKER QUANTITY YOU HAVE AGREED IN THE CHARTER-PARTY ON REDELIVERY. IF, FOR EXAMPLE, IT IS STATED TO BE "MINIMUM 300 TONS" AND YOU REDELIVER 50 MT LESS, YOU AS THE CHARTERERS ARE IN BREACH. YOU HAVE TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR DAMAGE RESULTING FROMN THIS BREACH.  IT CAN BE THE PRICE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE CHARTER-PARTY BUNKER PRICE AND THE MARKET PRICE AT THE REDELIVERY PORT.  IT CAN SOMETIMES BE MORE SERIOUS SUCH AS, INSUFFICIENT BUNKER AFTER REDELIVERY CAUSE THE VESSEL HAVING TO CALL A NEARBY PORT JUST FOR BUNKERING.

THE FACT THAT IN THE CHARTER-PARTY, YOU HAVE AGREED TO REDELIVER WITH "MINIMUM 300 MT". THIS IS STRICT LIABILITY, LIKE ANY UNQUALIFIED CONTRACTUAL PROMISE.  SO THE FACT THAT IT WAS NOT YOUR FAULT, AND IT WAS BECAUSE OF TYPHOON THE VESSEL ENCOUNTERED ENROUTE, ETC., IS NO EXCUSE. YOU AS CHARTERERS SIMPLY MUST REDELIVERY WITH "MINIMUM 300 MT" OR YOU HAVE TO PAY DAMAGE TO THE OWNERS.

A SHORTFALL OF 50 MT BUNKER IS JUST A BREACH OF WARRANTY. THE OWNERS CANNOT USE THIS EXCUSE TO REFUSE OR REJECT YOUR REDELIVERY OF VESSEL.