Documentation

The BDN Clause That Cost a Charterer $200K

One overlooked sentence in the Bunker Delivery Note. A charter dispute. $200,000 in legal fees and lost time. All from missing one clause verification.

Bunkering101
December 5, 2024
7 min read

The BDN Clause That Cost a Charterer $200K

He skimmed the Bunker Delivery Note. Signed it.

Three months later, when charterers disputed fuel quality, he learned one clause had cost him everything.

The Incident

Charterer: European shipowner

Vessel: MV Nordic Star

Voyage: Europe to Brazil, round charter

Bunkering: Rotterdam, 1,200 MT VLSFO

Problem: Engine performance issues mid-voyage.

Charterer's Claim: Fuel didn't meet specifications—off-hire claim for delays and performance bonus.

The Missing Clause

The BDN contained this clause:

> *"Fuel grade per ISO 8217:2024, with sodium content not exceeding 60 mg/kg and catalytic fines not exceeding 70 mg/kg."*

The charterer argued fuel didn't meet these specs.

But the chief engineer had signed the BDN noting "Fuel received in good order and condition."

The Legal Battle

Charterer's Position

  • BDN specified ISO 8217:2024 with specific limits
  • Engine performance issues indicated non-compliance
  • Chief engineer's acceptance confirmed fuel met these specs
  • If fuel was non-compliant, chief engineer should have noted it
  • Owner's Defense

  • Standard industry practice to sign for delivery
  • No testing equipment on board to verify specs
  • Relied on supplier's Certificate of Quality
  • Engine issues could have other causes
  • Arbitration Ruling

    The chief engineer's signature on the BDN was deemed acceptance of fuel quality.

    Without documented discrepancies noted at delivery, the owner was liable.

    Final judgment: $200,000 in charterer's favor.

    The Mistake

    What the Chief Engineer Did

  • Checked fuel grade matched order ✓
  • Verified quantity approximately correct ✓
  • Confirmed sulphur content within limits ✓
  • Signed BDN ✓
  • What He Missed

  • **Did not verify** BDN clause against actual limits
  • **Did not note** any discrepancies on BDN
  • **Did not request** Certificate of Quality before signing
  • **Did not retain** sample for later testing
  • Critical BDN Verification

    Before Signing, Verify:

  • [ ] Fuel grade matches purchase order
  • [ ] ISO 8217 edition specified (2017 vs 2024)
  • [ ] All numerical limits are within standard
  • [ ] Density and temperature recorded
  • [ ] Certificate of Quality attached
  • [ ] Sample seal numbers documented
  • [ ] Any discrepancies NOTED on BDN
  • The Golden Rule

    If something is wrong, note it on the BDN before signing.

    Write:

  • "Quantity to be verified after tank sounding"
  • "Subject to laboratory analysis"
  • "Sulphur content to be confirmed"
  • "Grade verification pending"
  • Once you sign without notation, you've accepted the fuel as-delivered.

    The BDN Protection Checklist

    Don't sign until you've verified everything.

    Get the BDN Verification Checklist:

  • Pre-signing verification steps
  • Common dangerous clauses to watch for
  • Discrepancy notation templates
  • Certificate of Quality review guide
  • Sample seal documentation
  • [Download the Free BDN Verification Checklist]

    The $200K Lesson

    That chief engineer now:

  • Reviews every BDN clause before signing
  • Notes any uncertainties on the document
  • Never signs without CoQ attached
  • Always retains samples for 90+ days
  • A $200,000 education.

    Don't make the same mistake.

    Verify every clause. Note every discrepancy. Protect yourself before you sign.

    Related Articles

    Operations

    The $75K Mistake: How a Junior Buyer Lost a Quantity Dispute

    He signed the BDN without verifying. The meter readings didn't match. Three months later, he learned why documentation matters.

    Compliance

    Failed ECA Entry: $100K Fine for Incomplete Fuel Switch

    They calculated 90 minutes for fuel system changeover. At 60 minutes, Port State Control boarded. Sulphur content still showed 0.35%. The fine: $100,000.