CERTAIN EMPLOYEES OF THE VETERANS' MAY 5, 1949.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House and ordered to be printed Mr. BYRNE of New York, from the Committee on the Judiciary submitted the following REPORT [To accompany S. 683] The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the bill (S. 683) to relieve certain employees of the Veterans' Administration from financial liability for certain overpayments, having considered the same, report favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that the bill do pass. The facts will be found fully set forth in Senate Report No. 165, Eightieth Congress, which is appended hereto and made a part of this report. Your committee concur in the recommendation of the Senate. [8. Rept. No. 165, 81st Cong., 1st sess.) The purpose of the proposed legislation is to relieve certain officers of the Veterans' Administration of financial liability for excess or erroneous payment made by them in the course of their official duties. STATEMENT The total amount involved in this bill is $396.37 covering various items paid by various certifying officers in instances in which it is believed by the Veterans' Administration that there was no fault or negligence on the part of the certifying officers. Repeated efforts to collect the amounts from those to whom they were paid erroneously have been unsuccessful; and while the bill does not relieve the payees of liability, it does remove the technical responsibility of the certifying officers. Attached hereto and made a part of this report is a letter received from the Veterans' Administration requesting the introduction of above legislation. In the interest of economy, the accompanying enclosures comprising 18 typewritten pages setting forth the facts in each individual case are being held in the committee files and are available for inspection by any Members of the Senate who may be interested. H. Repts., 81-1, vol. 3—21 VETERANS' ADMINISTRATION, Hon. ALBEN W. BARKLEY, President of the Senate, Washington 25, D. C. Washington, January 24, 1949. DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: There is transmitted herewith draft of a proposed bill to relieve certain employees of the Veterans' Administration from financial liability for certain overpayments, with the request that it be introduced and considered for enactment. A detailed explanation of the items concerned for which relief is sought is enclosed. The items referred to involve erroneous payments from the appropriations "Salaries and expenses" in the amount of $329.37 and "Army and Navy pensions" in the amount of $67 under various symbols. The total amount for which credit is requested is $396.37. Repeated efforts to secure refunds from the payees involved have been unsuccessful and collection from the employees held financially responsible is not felt to be just or fair in view of the fact that in no case was the error the result of willful negligence on the part of the employee but rather a natural human tendency to err under the pressure of a volume of work to be accomplished in a given time. The amount covered in the proposed bill represents but a negligible fraction of the total disbursements made by the Veterans' Administration over the period during which such overpayments were made. It is not my policy to condone an error or encourage negligence, but in view of the circumstances under which each of the overpayments referred to in the proposed bill was made, it is believed that it would be inequitable to hold the employees involved financially responsible for such overpayments. The Veterans' Administration has been advised that the Bureau of the Budget would have no objection to the presentation of the draft bill for the consideration of the Congress. Sincerely yours; CARL R. GRAY, Jr., Administrator. O 81ST CONGRESS HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session { REPORT No. 521 FIRST-CITIZENS BANK & TRUST CO., ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ESTATE OF C. A. RAGLAND, SR. MAY 5, 1949.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House and ordered to be printed Mr. BYRNE of New York, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the following REPORT [To accompany S. J. Res. 18) The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the joint resolution (S. J. Res. 18) for the relief of First-Citizens Bank & Trust Co., administrator of the estate of C. A. Ragland, Sr., having considered the same, report favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that the joint resolution do pass. The facts will be found fully set forth in Senate Report No. 231, Eighty-first Congress, which is appended hereto and made a part of this report. Your committee concur in the recommendation of the Senate. The purpose of the proposed legislation is to provide for the payment to the First-Citizens Bank & Trust Co., of Raleigh, N. Ĉ., as administrator of the estate of C. A. Ragland, Sr., deceased, of the sum of $9,860.35, to which the Court of Claims found the trust company to be entitled, after consideration under Senate Resolution 256 of the Seventy-eighth Congress. IS. Rept. No. 231, 81st Cong., 1st sess. AMENDMENTS 1. On page 2, line 9, after the word "entitled", strike out all down through the comma in line 14. 2. On page 2, line 14, strike out the word "sums", and insert "sum". STATEMENT The controversy in this case was originally submitted in the Seventy-eighth Congress by way of a bill (S. 961) providing for the outright payment of $61,198.18 to the claimants named above. At that time the Senate submitted the controversy to the Court of Claims pursuant to section 151 of the Judicial Code. The Court of Claims, after a complete hearing and investigation made its report to Congress on March 1, 1948, recommending payment in the amount of the resolution presently under consideration. It will be noted that the resolution has been amended to strike out that portion thereof awarding interest from August 19, 1938, and actual court costs incurred by the claimants. The committee feel that it would be an undesirable precedent to make these awards in addition to the amount determined by the Court of Claims to be due the claimants. Attached hereto and made a part of this report is a letter received from Department of Justice in connection with an identical resolution of the Eightieth Congress. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Hon. ALEXANDER WILEY, United States Senate, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR SENATOR: This is in response to your request for the views of this Department concerning the bill (S. J. Res. 199) for the relief of the First-Citizens Bank & Trust Co., administrator of the estate of C. A. Ragland, Sr. The bill would provide for payment to the First-Citizens Bank & Trust Co., of Raleigh, N. C., as administrator of the estate of C. A. Ragland, Sr., deceased, of (1) the sum of $9,860.35, to which the Court of Claims found the trust company to be entitled, together with 6-percent interest on such sum from August 19, 1938, and (2) the sum of $1,555.55 representing court costs incurred in presenting the claim to the Court of Claims. The bill provides that the payment of such sums shall be in full satisfaction of the claims arising out of the work performed by C. A. Ragland, Sr., under two contracts for the construction of certain roads in the Shenandoah-Great Smoky Mountain Parkway. In the Seventy-eighth Congress, a pending bill (S. 961) for Mr. Ragland's relief was referred to the Court of Claims by virtue of Senate Resolution 256, and that court, after hearings, came to the conclusion that claimant was entitled to the sum of $9,860.35. The date from which interest on this sum is claimed is the date when the final voucher was paid. Claimant had reserved the right to enter a claim when he signed the final voucher. Under existing law (31 U. S. C. 226) judgments of the Court of Claims which are reviewed by the Supreme Court bear interest at the rate of 4 percent per annum from the date of the filing of the transcript of the judgment in the Treasury Department. Interest is not paid on such judgments unless they are reviewed by the Supreme Court or unless the judgment specifically provides for interest, as is usually the case in eminent-domain proceedings where the interest is paid as a part of "just compensation." The judgment for which interest is sought in this case was not one of the type which ordinarily bears interest and there would appear to be no reasons for according to claimant preferential treatment. The provision of the bill which would award interest from the date of payment of the final voucher is not in accord with existing law (31 U. S. C. 226) which provides that interest shall be paid only from the date of filing a certified copy of the transcript of judgment with the Treasury Department, and then only on judgments in favor of claimants which have been reviewed upon petition of the United States and affirmed by the Supreme Court. To award such interest would be to give claimant the advantage of a longer interest bearing period than is given to other plaintiffs similarly situated. The rate of interest provided for in the bill is also not in accordance with the provisions of the above-cited statute which provides for interest at the rate of 4 percent per annum. To award the higher rate of interest would also give to claimant special benefits not enjoyed by others. With respect to that portion of the bill which provides for reimbursement for court costs incurred, it should be pointed out this item is not only unsupported by data, but is also in conflict with the rule of the Court of Claims establishing costs. Rule 101 of the court fixes a filing fee of $10 and provides for other costs not pertinent in the instant case. In no case is the Government assessed costs such as reporters' fees, attorneys' fees, printing costs, or other costs. The allowance of court costs in this case would tend to establish an undesirable precedent through which the Government might be called upon to pay costs in numerous other cases of like character. |