Wednesday, February 24, 2016
Monday, February 15, 2016
Thursday, February 4, 2016
Port Wings News Network:
Reacting to Port Wings news article titled “DP World Chennai’s Costly Mistake Puts Importer in Trouble,” APM Terminals has clarified that APM Terminals’ Chennai CFS have no any role in the whole issue.
In a media statement, APM Terminals Inland Services South Asia stated that it played no role in assigning the delivery destination of the container in question and just followed normal procedure to move the container from port to the CFS facility based on instruction received from the shipping line.
“This was done in compliance to notice 45/2007 given by the Indian Customs. The Customs has to approve the move before the box can be moved. APM Terminals Inland Services, South Asia is not privy to any communication between customer and port or shipping line. The customer has the right to choose the CFS facility the container can go to,” the clarification statement added.
MAERSK LINE INSTRUCTED TO MOVE THE BOX TO CFS
In the same statement, APM Terminals stated that the reefer box was moved to its CFS located on the outskirts of Chennai from the DP World Chennai Container Terminal (CCTL) on the instruction from Maersk Line, the shipping line that brought in the container for the importer Balaji Flowers of Nilgiris.
MAERSK LINE’S EMAIL TO IMPORTER
According to the importer, based on his request to not to move the said container to any CFS, Maesrk Line’s representative using the email id (email@example.com) on Dec 18 (at 16:24 hrs) replied that the terminal (CCTL) has been instructed to hold the container.
“Dear Customer, with reference to the below (request), terminal (CCTL) is already instructed to hold container at port. Please pay SSR charges and confirm in order to post ESSR,” read the email reply sent to the importer from Maersk Line.
MYSTERY REMAINS UNSOLVED
While the Maersk Line confirmed to the importer about holding the container at the CCTL (DP World Chennai), it remains a mystery whether the same instruction has been shared with the terminal CCTL to hold the container at the port.
The clarification from APM Terminals clearly suggests that Maersk Line bungled in the issue and failed to instruct the CCTL on time to hold the container. Under such circumstances, it has emerged that the mistake of Maersk Line has led to the mix up and CCTL moved the container to APM Terminals CFS as PNR movement.