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

B-185069 1 (1976-01-02)

handle is hein.gao/gaobadiyp0001 and id is 1 raw text is: D DECISION FILE: B-185069 MATTER OF: DIGEST: I I \ THE COMPTRrLER GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES WASHINGTON. 0. C. 20548 DATE: 99 George T. Quinn - Reimbursement of forfeited I deposit on house purchase L 1 L - Employee who was in the process of purchasing a new residence incident to a transfer and was prevented from completing the purchase trans- action by a second transfer may have the deposit forfeited included as a miscellaneous expense allowance incident to his two transfers and he would be entitled to the maximum mis- cellaneous expense allowance for each transfer as provided in para. 2-3.3b of the FTR not to exceed the actual miscellaneous expense incurred. This action is in response to a request for an advance decision by an authorized certifying officer of the United States Department of Justice as to the propriety of certifying for pay- ment the reclaim voiicber of rorge T. Quinn for expenss =n ured in connection with the purchase of a house incident to his transfer to Tampa, Florida. The record shows that Mr. Quinn was transferred from Washington D.C. to Tampa, Florida on April 7p 1975. On May 8, 1975, he entered into a contract to purchase a house at his new official duty station. Pursuant to the contract he deposited $2,500 as earnest money and the settlement date was to be on or before June 30, 1975, but due to certain legal requirements the settle- ment date was rescheduled for July 18, 1975. On July 16, 1975, Mr. Quinn received official notification of his transfer from Tampa to Baltimore, Maryland. As a result of this transfer, he elected not to proceed with the settlement on the purchase of the house. He therefore, forfeited the $2,500 he had deposited as earnest money. Mr. Quinn states that his original voucher was returned by the administrative office with a copy of our decision B-162274, dated September 11, 1967, disallowing a claim by an employee for earnest money deposited. Reimbursement of the forfeited deposit in that case was disallowed on the ground thatp had the sale of the realty been completed, the employee could not have been reimbursed i*nder. Public Law 89-516 (5 U.S.C. 5724a) or the reg- ulations issued pursuant thereto for the earnest money deposited in accordance with the contract of sale. dyb rrT-TCc:1 ......

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