Wifcon.Forum Archives

To Contents	Ship in Place
By anonbob on Friday, February 28, 2003 - 09:53 am: I have heard the term many times but never had to dig into the meaning till now. A vendor is ready to deliver us a large piece of equipment, but our facility is not ready to receive it. DCM Quality has already signed for it, but final acceptance was to be at destination. It is not the vendors fault, so we want to pay for it and have him hold it for us until we are ready to receive it. Will "ship in place" apply here? Where can I find out more about this term, and are there pitfalls to using it? By Vern Edwards on Friday, February 28, 2003 - 10:56 am: "Ship in place" is a form of constructive delivery. It is usually done to allow a contractor to get paid even though it has not actually shipped the items in question. It has figured in a number of board decisions. See, e.g., TRW, Inc., ASBCA No. 51003, 00-2 BCA ¶ 30,992, July 27, 2000. I do not believe that the practice is mentioned in FAR, but I could be wrong. By Cherokee21 on Friday, February 28, 2003 - 11:31 pm: You are right Vern. Might want to ask if there charges for holding the item. By Ophelia on Tuesday, March 04, 2003 - 10:54 am: We ran into a similar issue last year. The supplier needs to lock up the deliverables, i.e. provide them protection, especially if they are considered Government Property. We had problems with auditors. They would not allow us to claim the sale on a ship in place--a sticky wicket. By Linda Koone on Tuesday, March 04, 2003 - 11:33 am: If the Govt accepts the material, it becomes Government property. FAR 45.505-10(a) envisions a 'ship-in-place' type situation.

Ship in Place

By anonbob on Friday, February 28, 2003 - 09:53 am:

I have heard the term many times but never had to dig into the meaning till now. A vendor is ready to deliver us a large piece of equipment, but our facility is not ready to receive it.

DCM Quality has already signed for it, but final acceptance was to be at destination. It is not the vendors fault, so we want to pay for it and have him hold it for us until we are ready to receive it.

Will "ship in place" apply here? Where can I find out more about this term, and are there pitfalls to using it?

By Vern Edwards on Friday, February 28, 2003 - 10:56 am:

"Ship in place" is a form of constructive delivery. It is usually done to allow a contractor to get paid even though it has not actually shipped the items in question. It has figured in a number of board decisions. See, e.g., TRW, Inc., ASBCA No. 51003, 00-2 BCA ¶ 30,992, July 27, 2000.

I do not believe that the practice is mentioned in FAR, but I could be wrong.

By Cherokee21 on Friday, February 28, 2003 - 11:31 pm:

You are right Vern. Might want to ask if there charges for holding the item.

By Ophelia on Tuesday, March 04, 2003 - 10:54 am:

We ran into a similar issue last year. The supplier needs to lock up the deliverables, i.e. provide them protection, especially if they are considered Government Property.

We had problems with auditors. They would not allow us to claim the sale on a ship in place--a sticky wicket.

By Linda Koone on Tuesday, March 04, 2003 - 11:33 am:

If the Govt accepts the material, it becomes Government property. FAR 45.505-10(a) envisions a 'ship-in-place' type situation.