April 28, 2000 In the Matter of the Petition by DANNY NIEVES 108 Duelk Avenue at Monroe, NY 10950-2023 P. S. Docket No. DCA 00-37 APPEARANCE FOR PETITIONER: Gwendolyn E. Scott James A. Farley Building 421 8th Avenue New York, NY 10199-9401 APPEARANCE FOR RESPONDENT: James Wolahan Labor Relations Specialist United States Postal Service James A. Farley Bldg., Room 3505 421 8th Avenue New York, NY 10199-9401
FINAL DECISION UNDER THE DEBT COLLECTION ACT OF 1982
Petitioner, Danny Nieves, filed a timely Petition requesting an oral hearing under the Debt Collection Act of 1982, as amended, 5 U.S.C. §5514(a), after receiving a Notice of Involuntary Administrative Salary Offsets on January 22, 2000. The Notice advised Petitioner that he was indebted to the Postal Service in the amount of $111.30 resulting from a shortage identified in his flexible credit on February 16, 1996.
A hearing was held on March 28, 2000, in New York, NY. The Postal Service presented the testimony of two employees, and Petitioner testified on his own behalf. In addition to the transcript of the hearing, the record consists of Respondent’s Exhibits R-1 through R-4, and Petitioner’s Exhibit P-1.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Petitioner is a window clerk at the James A. Farley Post Office in New York, NY. On February 16, 1996, Petitioner’s flexible credit was audited and found to be short $111.30. Petitioner participated in the audit and indicated his agreement with the accuracy of the audit by signing the audit documents. The supervisor who performed the audit did not investigate possible causes for the shortage at the time of the audit. (Transcript page (Tr.) 7, 15; R-3).
2. Petitioner received a Letter of Demand on March 8, 1996, seeking repayment of the $111.30 shortage(1). Although Petitioner has no specific recollection of this shortage, it was his practice at that time to simply repay small shortages in his accountability rather than file a grievance. Petitioner does not have a receipt indicating repayment. (Tr. 23-26; R-1).
3. On January 22, 2000, Respondent issued Petitioner a Notice of Involuntary Administrative Salary Offsets seeking repayment of the $111.30 shortage, and Petitioner filed a timely petition for a Debt Collection Act hearing. Petitioner also filed a request with his supervisors for all documents relevant to the shortage. In response, Respondent stated, ". . . all documents in this case have been previously requested during the initial phase of the audit and Grievance/Arbitration period. In accordance with the Statement of Debtor’s Rights and Responsibilities these documents are not available to you." (Petitioner’s Exhibit P-1; Petition).
DECISION
Respondent argues that it has established that there was a loss to the Postal Service as a result of the shortage in Petitioner’s flexible credit, identified in the February 16, 1996 audit, and that Petitioner should be held responsible for repaying that loss. Petitioner does not challenge the audit’s findings of a shortage in the amount of $111.30 (Finding of Fact No. (FOF) 1). However, Petitioner argues that he believes he repaid this shortage and that he lost the receipt for repayment in the four years since the shortage was identified. Petitioner further argues that his rights were violated when Respondent did not provide relevant documents that may have exonerated him from repaying the shortage.
Petitioner is correct that Respondent did not have the right to withhold from him any documents relevant to the issue of the alleged debt. Respondent did not explain the basis for its statement in Petitioner’s Exhibit No. 1, or provide any evidence that the requested documents were previously provided to Petitioner. However, contrary to Respondent’s statement that the documents were not available to him "in accordance with the Statement of Debtor’s Rights and Responsibilities," the Debt Collection Act specifically provides that a Petitioner has the right to inspect and copy any records relating to the debt prior to the Postal Service initiating any proceeding to collect the debt. 5 U.S.C. §5514(a)(2)(B). Respondent’s failure to provide Petitioner with documents necessary to investigate possible causes for the shortage, coupled with the fact that Respondent waited almost four years before issuing the Notice of Involuntary Administrative Salary Offsets to Petitioner, have prejudiced Petitioner’s ability to offer evidence on his behalf. See Deborah Chong, P.S. Docket no. DCA 99-384 (November 17, 1999).
Accordingly, the Petition is sustained. Respondent may not collect this alleged debt from Petitioner’s salary.
William K. Mahn Administrative Judge