(a) Compliance with regulations. A claim for loss or damage to baggage or for loss, damage, injury, or delay to cargo, shall not be voluntarily paid by a carrier unless filed, as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, with the receiving or delivering carrier, or carrier issuing the bill of lading, receipt, ticket, or baggage check, or carrier on whose line the alleged loss, damage, injury, or delay occurred, within the specified time limits applicable thereto and as otherwise may be required by law, the terms of the bill of lading or other contract of carriage, and all tariff provisions applicable thereto.
(b) Minimum filing requirements. A written communication from a claimant, filed with a proper carrier within the time limits specified in the bill of lading or contract of carriage or transportation and:
(1) Containing facts sufficient to identify the baggage or shipment (or shipments) of property,
(2) Asserting liability for alleged loss, damage, injury, or delay, and
(3) Making claim for the payment of a specified or determinable amount of money, shall be considered as sufficient compliance with the provisions for filing claims embraced in the bill of lading or other contract of carriage; Provided, however, That procedures are established to ensure reasonable carrier access to supporting documents.
(c) Documents not constituting claims. Bad order reports, appraisal reports of damage, notations of shortage or damage, or both, on freight bills, delivery receipts, or other documents, or inspection reports issued by carriers or their inspection agencies, whether the extent of loss or damage is indicated in dollars and cents or otherwise, shall, standing alone, not be considered by carriers as sufficient to comply with the minimum claim filing requirements specified in paragraph (b) of this section.
(d) Claims filed for uncertain amounts. Whenever a claim is presented against a proper carrier for an uncertain amount, such as “$100 more or less,” the carrier against whom such claim is filed shall determine the condition of the baggage or shipment involved at the time of delivery by it, if it was delivered, and shall ascertain as nearly as possible the extent, if any, of the loss or damage for which it may be responsible. It shall not, however, voluntarily pay a claim under such circumstances unless and until a formal claim in writing for a specified or determinable amount of money shall have been filed in accordance with the provisions of paragraph (b) of this section.
(e) Other claims. If investigation of a claim develops that one or more other carriers has been presented with a similar claim on the same shipment, the carrier investigating such claim shall communicate with each such other carrier and, prior to any agreement entered into between or among them as to the proper disposition of such claim or claims, shall notify all claimants of the receipt of conflicting or overlapping claims and shall require further substantiation, on the part of each claimant of his/her title to the property involved or his/her right with respect to such claim.
[62 FR 32042, June 12, 1997, as amended at 83 FR 16223, Apr. 16, 2018]
Notes of Decisions
Lewis v. Atlas Van Lines, Inc., 542 F.3d 403 (3rd Cir. 2008).
· cites it 9× “It argued that the Lewises’ state law claims were preempted by the Amendment and that the Lewises could not obtain relief under that statute because they had not complied with an associated regulation, 49 C.F.R. § 370.3 , which requires a shipper to file a claim “for a specified…”
Raineri v. North Am. Van Lines, Inc., 906 F. Supp. 2d 334 (D.N.J. 2012).
· cites it 5× “49 C.F.R. § 370.3 (b). 8 NAVL argues that Raineri’s several emails to NAVL customer service representatives fail to conform to the standard set by the federal regulations, insofar as those e-mails are neither written (i.”
Delphax Sys., Inc. v. Mayflower Transit, Inc., 54 F. Supp. 2d 60 (D. Mass. 1999).
· cites it 7× “ICC regulation 49 C.F.R. § 370.3 (b) sets minimum filing requirements for claims: A written or electronic communication (when agreed to by the carrier and shipper or receiver involved) from a claimant, filed with a proper carrier within the time limits specified in the bill of…”
Parramore v. Tru-Pak Moving Sys., Inc., 286 F. Supp. 2d 643 (M.D.N.C. 2003).
· cites it 3× “49 C.F.R. § 370.3 (2003). Although a copy of the tariff was not offered to Plaintiffs prior to shipping, the bill of lading clearly states that the tariffs terms are part of the contract.”
McLaughlin Transp. Sys., Inc. v. Rubinstein, 390 F. Supp. 2d 50 (D. Mass. 2005).
· cites it 4× “DISCUSSION The minimum claim filing requirements are enumerated in McLaughlin’s tariff and the FMCSA at 49 C.F.R. § 370.3 . Both require that a claim “(1) [c]ontain[] facts sufficient to identify the .”
5K Logistics, Inc. v. Daily Express, Inc., 659 F.3d 331 (4th Cir. 2011).
“REVERSED AND REMANDED * Because the inadequacy of 5K's filing is undisputed, we need not resolve the question that has divided our sister circuits on whether strict compliance with the claim requirements of 49 C.F.R. §§ 370.3 (b) and 1005.2 is required, or whether substantial…”
Union Pac. R.R. v. Beemac Trucking, LLC, 929 F. Supp. 2d 904 (D. Neb. 2013).
· cites it 4× “Notice of the claim must be provided in a manner consistent with 49 C.F.R. § 370.3 (b), which states: Minimum filing requirements.”
Transit Homes of Am. v. Homes of Legend, Inc., 173 F. Supp. 2d 1185 (N.D. Ala. 2001).
“More specifically, Morgan claims that in order for HOL to recover against it for any loss or damage under the Carmack Amendment, HOL had to comply with the notice-of-loss or damage requirements set forth at 49 C.F.R. § 370.3 , which Morgan alleges HOL did not do.”
Montalvo v. Bekins Moving Solutions, Inc., 613 F. Supp. 2d 892 (S.D. Tex. 2009).
“Carrier liability, however, under the Carmack Amendment is limited to claims for reimbursement made in compliance with 49 CFR 370.3, which states, in relevant part: (b) Minimum filing requirements.”
Taylor v. Mayflower Transit, Inc., 161 F. Supp. 2d 651 (W.D.N.C. 2000).
“[The interstate carrier] shall not voluntarily pay a claim under such circumstances unless and until a formal claim in writing for a specified or determinable amount of money should have been filed in accordance with section (b) of this section.”
— 49 C.F.R. § 370.3(a) — 1 case
Union Pac. R.R. v. Beemac Trucking, LLC, 929 F. Supp. 2d 904 (D. Neb. 2013).
“Notice of the claim must be provided in a manner consistent with 49 C.F.R. § 370.3 (b), which states: Minimum filing requirements.”
— 49 C.F.R. § 370.3(b) — 1 case
— 49 C.F.R. § 370.3(d) — 1 case
Taylor v. Mayflower Transit, Inc., 161 F. Supp. 2d 651 (W.D.N.C. 2000).
“[The interstate carrier] shall not voluntarily pay a claim under such circumstances unless and until a formal claim in writing for a specified or determinable amount of money should have been filed in accordance with section (b) of this section.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.