A shipbroker had previously arranged a fixture between the same principals with discharging in north China. The discharge range had been designated as 1-2 port(s) Qingdao-Dongying. The fixture had proceeded smoothly.
The charterer had a further cargo which the shipbroker was told was destined for Jinzhou. The shipbroker contacted the owners and agreed terms on the basis of the previous fixture. The agreement was made in a hurry due to an approaching holiday. Unfortunately, the shipbroker failed to check if the intended port was in the previously agreed range - which it was not.
When voyage orders were passed through to the owners, they pointed out that the port was outside the agreed range. Furthermore, the owners did not wish to agree because Jinzhou is a potential ice port and their ship was not an ice class ship. Ultimately the owners agreed that they would go to Jinzhou for an additional US$ 25,000 freight and an additional clause in the fixture to fully protect the owners regarding the ice issue.
The shipbroker, with ITIC’s agreement, accepted that they would indemnify the charterers. Fortunately when the ship arrived the port was ice free.