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