One Sampling Mistake That Cost $120K in a Fuel Quality Claim
The sample was collected correctly. But the chain of custody had one gap. That gap cost them the dispute—and $120,000 in engine repairs.
One Sampling Mistake That Cost $120K in a Fuel Quality Claim
The sample showed cat fines at 95 mg/kg—nearly double the ISO limit.
The fuel caused $120,000 in engine damage.
But they lost the claim on a technicality.
The Incident
Vessel: MV Coral Bay
Location: Rotterdam
Fuel: 800 MT VLSFO
Problem: Catastrophic fuel pump and injector failure
Lab Results:
Supplier should have paid. Didn't.
The Fatal Error
Sample Collection Was Perfect
Chain of Custody Had One Gap
Between the vessel and the lab, there was a 48-hour unexplained gap.
The supplier's lawyer found it. They argued:
Arbitration ruled: Sample inadmissible. Claim denied.
What Went Wrong
Mistake 1: No Immediate Documentation
The sample wasn't logged in a chain of custody form at collection time.
No written record of:
Mistake 2: Storage Gap
The sample sat in the chief engineer's office for 2 days before shipping to the lab.
No documentation of:
Mistake 3: No Backup Sample
Only one sample was collected. The supplier's sample (collected at barge) showed different results.
Without a vessel sample matching the lab's findings, the claim failed.
The $120K Cost
All paid by the vessel owner.
Proper Sampling Protocol
At Collection
Immediately After
For Lab Submission
Always Collect Multiple Samples
|--------|---------|-----------|
That backup sample saved the day in a similar case—when the lab sample was lost in shipping.
The Complete Sampling Protection Kit
Don't let a technicality kill your claim.
Get the Sampling Protection Kit:
[Download the Free Sampling Protection Kit]
Key Lessons
A proper sample is your only defense in fuel quality disputes.
One gap in the chain of custody can cost you everything.