May 17, 2000 In the Matter of the Petition by MICHAEL A. MARTIN U.S. Postal Service 16 Washington Street at Norwalk, CT 06856-9998 P. S. Docket No. DCA 00-78 APPEARANCE FOR PETITIONER: Michael A. Martin United States Postal Service 16 Washington Street Norwalk, CT 06856-9998 APPEARANCE FOR RESPONDENT: Thomas J. O'Keeffe Labor Relations Specialist United States Postal Service 427 West Avenue Stamford, CT 06910-9411
FINAL DECISION UNDER THE DEBT COLLECTION ACT OF 1982
Petitioner, Michael Martin, filed a timely Petition after receiving a Notice of Involuntary Administrative Salary Offsets from his postmaster on February 18, 2000. This Notice stated the Postal Service's intention to withhold $196.00 from Petitioner's salary to recover a loss sustained by Petitioner's accepting a bad check from a customer.
Petitioner elected a hearing based on written submissions, and the parties were given an opportunity to file additional evidence and argument, beyond that submitted with the Petition and the Answer. Both parties filed additional documents. The following findings of fact are based on all the material submitted by the parties.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Petitioner is a window clerk at the Norwalk, Connecticut Post Office. He has been a postal employee for seventeen years.
2. On June 3, 1999, a customer presented Petitioner a personal check for $196.00 for purchase of postal products and services. The check had the name "Stephen P. Lazzaro" printed on it, but contained no other personal identifying information. Petitioner accepted the check after verifying the customer's photograph and signature from a Connecticut driver's license, and recording the driver's license number on the back of the check. He did not record the customer's address or telephone number.
3. Approximately one week later, Petitioner was informed by his supervisor that the check had been returned unpaid, stamped "INSF. FUNDS." On February 9, 2000, the Postal Service Accounting Service Center issued an invoice charging Petitioner with the lost $196.00.
4. Postal Service regulations permit the acceptance of personal checks as payment for postal products and services. Postal Service Handbook F-1, Post Office Accounting Procedures (November 1996) §312. The rules for accepting personal checks are listed in §312.1, and include a requirement to "verify that the check contains the customer's name and address."
DECISION
There is no dispute in this case that the Postal Service suffered a loss of $196.00, or that the loss was the result, at least indirectly, of Petitioner accepting a bad check.
Respondent's position is simply that Petitioner did not comply with all the procedural requirements for accepting a personal check in that he did not obtain and record the customer's address, and therefore that he must assume liability for the Postal Service's loss.
Petitioner concedes that he failed to record the customer's address, but argues that he was in substantial compliance with the regulation by verifying the customer's photo identification and signature and recording the driver's license number on the check. He contends that this, along with his many years of good and loyal service, should have been enough for his employer to forego asserting this debt claim. Perhaps these arguments could be given some weight in a settlement negotiation or a waiver request, but the rules for accepting personal checks are clear and a Debt Collection Act Hearing Official has no authority to disregard them.
There is another matter, however, that precludes holding Petitioner liable in this case. The Postal Service has made no showing as to what efforts, if any, were made to collect this debt from the person ultimately responsible, Mr. Lazzaro. Respondent must attempt, with reasonable diligence, to collect from the maker of a bad check before initiating debt collection action against an employee. Paul E. Logan, P.S. Docket No. DCA-105 (September 10, 1991); Coral S. Vellocido, P.S. Docket No. DCA-47 (September 19, 1989).
The Petition is granted. Respondent may not collect $196.00 from Petitioner's salary.
Bruce R. Houston Chief Administrative Law Judge