A bitter PIL for exporter

A bitter PIL for exporter

From Republika

In March 2000 we shipped some goods to Tahiti with Pacific International Line (PIL) via its Semarang-based agent Jangkar Pacific. As our buyer has not settled the whole payment, we are still keeping all of the shipping documents, hoping that the buyer will not be allowed to collect the consignment without showing the original Bill of Lading. Unfortunately, we have an e- mail message from our buyer saying that the consignment has been inspected and that they have filed a claim for the goods.

Having received this message, we contacted PIL for confirmation. To our surprise, we were told that the container had been collected by the buyer, who actually could not produce the original Bill of Lading. PIL admitted that they were in the wrong, and, finally, after a long and drawn out bargaining session with the PIL head office in Singapore, PIL promised to pay us compensation.

Shortly before the Bill of Lading was going to be handed over to PIL against their payment of the promised compensation to us, PIL set a number of conditions (among others, an agreement to the effect that we will not sue PIL in court, other official statements and so forth). As we cannot fulfill one of the conditions (as we do not think it is relevant to the matter), PIL canceled the payment of our compensation and promised to return the goods to us on the grounds that they would consider the matter a case of accidental shipment and pilferage committed by our buyer.

We find it hard to understand this reasoning and can only think that PIL has twisted the matter. Therefore we have been compelled to file a lawsuit against PIL.

In this context, we hope the government, in addition to bolstering exports to increase foreign exchange earnings, should also pay attention to problems which may arise in export and import activities and stipulate clear laws or regulations that protect Indonesian exporters.

AGUS HERI SETIYAWAN

Director of Buana Mitra Furniture

Jakarta