About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

B-182127 1 (1976-06-08)

handle is hein.gao/gaobaddkz0001 and id is 1 raw text is: a 7, THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL DECISION . OF THE UNITED STATES WASHINGTON, D.C. 20.54.8 N 8 176 FILE: B-182127 DATE: q (9 g-s MATTER OF: Ronald N. Lacey - Reimbursement of forfeited real estate deposit DIGEST: Employee claimed that he forfeited deposit on residential lot incident to transfer. Although employee's brother later purchased lot, employee may be reimburs- ed amount of deposit as part of miscellaneous ex- penses allowance since owner, not employee, deeded lot to brother and e.aployee received no money for transfer of his interest. This case concerns a request for a decision by Cathryn C. Powledge, an authorized certifying officer of the L-iteranl Revenue Service, as to whether she may certify for payment a voucher for $500 in favor of Ronald N. Lacey, an employee of the Service. The item represents an earnest money depo.sit on a parcel of land claimed to have been lo3t as a result of i4r. Lacey's transfer of official station. The case was previously submitted to this Office and recovery disallowed absent documentation showing the bona fide nature of a transaction whereby the patitioner's brother paid the balance of the purchase price of property involved. Documentation concerning the questioned transaction is included in the resubmission. Mr. Lacey purchased a lot on which he intended to build a residence. le deposited $500 of the purchase price on December 19, 1973. The remainder of the ;5,000 purchase price a due March 19, 1974. The sales contract provided that the :50 deposit would be forfeited, at the seller's option, upon Mr. Lacoy's failure to comply with the terms of the contract. Mr. Lacey was notified of his trans- fer froma Beaufort, South Carolina, to Colunbia, a.outh Carolina, on arch 7, 1974. At that time Mr. Lacey could not find a purchaser for the property. However, his brother, Mr. V. M. Lacey, Jr., eventually paid the $4,500 remairii; due on the sales contract to the seller and received title to tue property. Mr. Lacey claims his $500 deposit wa3 forfeited and seeks reimbursement. We have held that a real estate deposit forfeited incident to a transaction that did not qualify as a compensable expense under the Settlement of an unexpired lease provision in the Federal Travel Regulations (FP,4R 101-7) para. 2-6.2h (NMay 1973) could be reimbursed as a miscellaneous expense under para. 2-3.1b when the cause of the forfeiture was the transfer of the employee. uQ eCco Q836

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most