How to Raise Insufficient Packing Issues with a Shipper

Overview

During the investigation of a cargo damage claim, insufficient packing may become one of the possible causes of loss. Typical examples include weak wooden cases, insufficient internal securing, inadequate moisture protection, pallets that are not strong enough for heavy cargo, or packing that is not suitable for international transport.

However, raising a packing issue with a shipper is not easy. If the wording is too direct, the shipper may feel that the forwarder is simply trying to avoid responsibility. It may also damage the commercial relationship, especially where the shipper is a continuing customer.

In forwarding practice, the important point is not to accuse the shipper emotionally. The forwarder should treat packing condition as one possible issue in the cause-of-loss analysis, and explain it calmly based on evidence. This article explains how a forwarder should communicate possible insufficient packing to a shipper, how to use supporting documents, and what expressions should or should not be used.

Insufficient Packing Is Not a Mere Excuse, but a Cause-of-Loss Issue

When a forwarder raises possible insufficient packing with a shipper, the shipper may react by saying that the forwarder is trying to escape liability.

In practice, however, insufficient packing is not merely an excuse. In international transport, cargo may be exposed to long periods of vibration, cargo handling, transshipment, temperature and humidity changes, movement inside the container, CFS operations, and domestic delivery. The packing must therefore be suitable for the nature, weight, fragility, and transport route of the cargo.

When considering carrier liability or NVOCC liability, whether the cargo was packed in a manner reasonably suitable for ordinary transport is an important issue. In marine cargo insurance as well, insufficient or unsuitable packing may become a policy exclusion issue depending on the policy wording, the facts of the case, and the survey findings.

For that reason, the forwarder should not say, “We are not liable.” A safer and more professional approach is to say, “We need to review the packing condition in order to assess the cause of damage.”

Do Not Conclude Too Early

Immediately after a cargo accident, the forwarder should avoid saying, “This is clearly a packing defect.”

Even if the packing appears questionable, the damage may also have been caused or contributed to by dropping during transport, rough handling, collapse of cargo inside a container, contact with other cargo, forklift impact, or other external force during handling.

Conversely, where there is no serious external damage but only the internal cargo is damaged, insufficient internal securing or the structure of the cargo itself may become an important issue.

At the initial stage, the forwarder should usually use cautious expressions such as “there may be an issue with the packing condition,” “the packing and securing method should be reviewed,” or “we need to examine the relationship between the damage and any external force during transport.”

Documents to Review Before Raising a Packing Issue

Before raising possible insufficient packing with a shipper, the forwarder should review the available evidence carefully.

Relevant documents and materials may include pre-shipment photos, packing specifications, packing contractor records, vanning photos, cargo dimensions and weight, the condition of pallets, wooden cases and securing materials, arrival photos, survey reports, and close-up photos of the damaged parts.

One particularly important point is the relationship between the location of external damage and the location of internal damage. If an impact mark on the outer case corresponds with the internal damage location, an external force during transport may have contributed to the loss. On the other hand, if there is no visible external damage and only the internal securing has failed, the packing or securing method may become a stronger issue.

The forwarder should also check whether the same cargo has previously been shipped in the same packing without incident, or whether the packing specification was changed only for the shipment in question.

The Correct Order of Communication with the Shipper

When communicating a possible packing issue to the shipper, the order of explanation is important.

The forwarder should not begin by saying, “The packing was poor.” First, the forwarder should acknowledge the accident notice, explain that the physical condition of the cargo is being checked, and state that notification to the insurer, carrier, or other relevant parties is being considered.

Next, the forwarder should explain the facts already confirmed. For example, there may be an impact mark on the outer case, internal securing materials may have come loose, the pallet may be bent, moisture protection may be absent, or there may be signs that the cargo moved inside the wooden case.

Only after explaining the confirmed facts should the forwarder say that these conditions may indicate that the packing condition contributed to the damage.

If the conclusion is stated first, the shipper is more likely to reject the explanation. The safer sequence is: facts, documents, possible cause, and further items to be checked.

Useful English Phrases

When raising possible insufficient packing with a shipper, the following expressions are useful in practice.

“At this stage, we are not in a position to conclude the cause of damage. However, based on the photos and the physical condition of the cargo, the packing and internal securing condition may have contributed to the damage.”

“We need to review whether the cargo was packed and secured in a manner suitable for ordinary international transport, together with the possibility of any external force during transport.”

“For the purpose of explaining the matter to the carrier and the insurer, we will need the pre-shipment packing photos, packing specifications, and details of the internal securing method.”

“This does not mean that liability has already been determined. However, the packing condition should be reviewed as one of the possible factors in the cause-of-loss analysis.”

These expressions avoid blaming the shipper directly. Instead, they show that the packing condition is being reviewed as part of the factual investigation.

Expressions to Avoid

The following expressions should generally be avoided.

“This is completely due to insufficient packing.”

“This is the shipper’s responsibility.”

“The insurance will not pay for this.”

“The carrier has no liability.”

These statements may be understood as premature conclusions on liability or insurance coverage before the investigation has been completed. If external force during transport or improper handling by a carrier is later identified, the forwarder may find it difficult to explain the earlier statement.

In particular, the statement “the insurance will not pay” is dangerous. Whether a marine cargo insurance claim is payable depends on the policy wording, the cause of loss, the packing condition, the survey findings, and the insurer’s assessment. A forwarder should not make an early and categorical statement on insurance coverage.

Communicating with Overseas Shippers or Agents

When communicating with an overseas shipper or overseas agent, the forwarder should also avoid definitive language.

A useful expression is:

“Based on the photos and available records, insufficient internal packing or securing may have contributed to the damage. We are still reviewing the cause of loss and reserve our position pending further investigation.”

When requesting packing documents, the following wording may be used:

“Please provide the pre-shipment packing photos, packing specifications, and any records showing how the cargo was secured inside the package or container.”

When the explanation is to be used for insurers or carriers, the following expression may also be helpful:

“The available evidence suggests that the packing condition should be reviewed as one of the possible contributing factors to the damage.”

Expressions such as “may have contributed,” “possible contributing factor,” and “pending further investigation” are important. They help avoid premature conclusions while preserving the forwarder’s position.

Consistency with Explanations to Insurers and Carriers

When raising a possible packing issue with the shipper, the forwarder must ensure consistency with explanations given to the insurer and the carrier.

If the forwarder tells the shipper that the damage occurred during transport, but tells the carrier that the damage was caused by insufficient packing, the explanations may later become inconsistent.

Where the cause has not yet been confirmed, it is safer to say that both external force during transport and the packing condition are under review.

When reporting to the insurer, the forwarder should separate the confirmed facts, packing condition, external damage, internal damage, and the need for a survey.

When writing to the carrier, the forwarder should not assume that a packing issue alone automatically releases the carrier from liability. Depending on the facts, the forwarder may still need to request records regarding handling, stowage, container condition, terminal operations, or other possible external causes.

When Insufficient Packing Is Strongly Suspected

Even where the evidence strongly suggests insufficient packing, the forwarder should not simply push responsibility onto the shipper.

In such a case, the forwarder should also explain possible improvements for future shipments. These may include strengthening wooden cases, adding internal securing materials, using moisture protection, reinforcing the bottom structure for heavy cargo, checking pallet strength, and keeping clear pre-shipment photos.

Cargo claim handling is not only about allocating responsibility for the past accident. It should also lead to prevention of similar damage in future shipments.

For continuing shippers, it is particularly important to position the packing discussion as a preventive measure. The purpose is not to blame the shipper, but to reduce the risk of the next cargo damage claim.

Case Example: Explaining Insufficient Internal Securing to a Shipper

Machine parts were damaged after arrival, and the shipper notified the forwarder of the loss. The outer wooden case did not show major visible damage. However, the unpacking photos showed that the machine parts had moved inside the case, and some internal securing materials had come loose.

At first, the shipper suspected that the cargo had been handled roughly during transport. The forwarder did not immediately conclude that the damage was due to insufficient packing. Instead, the forwarder reviewed the pre-shipment photos, packing specifications, arrival photos, internal securing condition, and survey report.

After reviewing the materials, it appeared that there was no strong impact mark on the outer case, and that the movement of the cargo inside the case may have materially contributed to the damage. At the same time, external force during transport or handling could not be completely ruled out.

The forwarder informed the shipper as follows: “At this stage, we are not in a position to conclude the cause of damage. However, the internal securing condition may have contributed to the damage. For the purpose of explaining the matter to the insurer and the carrier, please provide the pre-shipment packing photos and records showing the securing method.”

The insurer’s survey later identified insufficient internal securing as one of the contributing factors to the damage. The shipper revised the securing method for future shipments and introduced a practice of keeping pre-shipment packing photos.

In this case, the important point was that the forwarder did not begin by blaming the shipper. By explaining the issue as a possible contribution to the damage based on evidence, the forwarder was able to maintain the commercial relationship while also improving future risk prevention.

Practical Points for Forwarders

When raising insufficient packing with a shipper, the forwarder should keep the following practical points in mind.

• Do not conclude the cause of damage too early.
• Explain confirmed facts before discussing possible causes.
• Separate external damage, internal damage, packing condition, and survey findings.
• Use cautious expressions such as “may have contributed” and “possible factor.”
• Do not make an early statement on insurance coverage.
• Keep explanations to the shipper, carrier, and insurer consistent.
• Use the incident as an opportunity to improve future packing standards.

Key Takeaway

When a forwarder raises insufficient packing with a shipper, the most important issue is the manner of communication.

The forwarder should not say, “This is the shipper’s responsibility.” A more appropriate expression is, “We need to review the packing condition in order to assess the cause of damage.”

Insufficient packing may affect carrier liability, marine cargo insurance, subrogation, and future loss prevention. However, if the issue is raised emotionally or too directly, it may damage the relationship with the shipper.

A forwarder should rely on photos, packing specifications, damage location, external condition, and survey findings. The explanation should avoid premature conclusions, preserve the forwarder’s position, and, where appropriate, lead to improved packing for future shipments.