________________
 
                            February 4, 1998
                            ________________
 
 
                            GSBCA 14356-RELO
 
 
                     In the Matter of PAUL S. SAYAH
 
 
        Paul S. Sayah, Howell, NJ, Claimant.
 
        Judy  Hughes,   Defense  Finance  and   Accounting  Service,
   Columbus  Center,  Columbus,  OH,  appearing  for  Department  of
   Defense.
 
   VERGILIO, Board Judge.
 
             In  conjunction with  a  change of  permanent duty
        station, the  claimant, under  an oral  extension of  a
        written   lease,  agreed  to  limit  liability  to  the
        landlord to two months' rent.  The claimant is entitled
        to be reimbursed for  the portion of this  period after
        he  vacated   the  apartment;   such  costs   represent
        unavoidable expenses directly attributable to the early
        termination  of the lease.  The claimant also forfeited
        a security deposit  in lieu of restoring  the apartment
        to  an acceptable  condition.    Because  such  a  cost
        represents   an   avoidable    expense   not   directly
        attributable  to  the  early  termination,  it  is  not
        reimbursable.
 
        The  claimant, Paul  S.  Sayah, a  civilian employee  of the
   Department of Defense, changed permanent duty stations within the
   continental United States.   For the  move the agency  authorized
   temporary quarters subsistence expense (TQSE) and unexpired lease
   expense.  At  the time he was  notified of the transfer,  in July
   1994, the claimant resided in  an apartment in Brooklyn, New York
   (at the old duty station),  under an oral extension of  a written
   two-year  lease.  He discussed his move  with his landlord.  They
   agreed to  limit his liability  to the  landlord to rent  for two
   months.  The claimant did not occupy temporary quarters; instead,
   he commuted from the apartment to the new duty station,  while he
   purchased  a residence at the  new duty station.   On November 3,
   the claimant received  confirmation that a mortgage  was approved
   for the  purchase of  a residence at  the new  duty station.   On
   November 4, the  claimant informed his  landlord of his  imminent
   departure, and the closing date  of November 10 for the purchase.
   The claimant vacated  his apartment on November 15.   On November
   19, the claimant and landlord  agreed that the claimant would pay
   rent  for November  and  December, and  that  the claimant  would
   forfeit the security deposit because the claimant did not wish to
   restore  the apartment to an  acceptable condition.  As evidenced
   by two checks, each for $850, the claimant paid his landlord rent
   for November and for December.  The claimant chose to forfeit the
   deposit  rather  than expend  the  time and  energy  cleaning and
   repairing the premises.
 
 
        In his principal argument, claimant seeks $2,266.67: $566.67
   as  prorated rent  for the  final  twenty days  of November  (the
   period  following the  closing  of  a purchase  at  the new  duty
   station); $850  for one month  lease breaking; and $850  for lost
   security  deposit.    In  the   alternative,  if  any  amount  is
   disallowed, the claimant seeks to recover TQSE.
 
        Applicable regulations entitle the claimant to be reimbursed
   for unavoidable expenses incurred which are directly attributable
   to the early termination of a  lease, with appropriate supporting
   documentation and explanation.   Joint  Travel Regulations  (JTR)
   C14003, C14005.
 
        The  claimant occupied  the apartment  through November  15.
   The claimant is not entitled to reimbursement while occupying his
   permanent residence at  the old duty station.   The rent expended
   on  the unexpired  portion of  the  lease after  vacating may  be
   reimbursed under the regulations.   The rent for November must be
   prorated  to  reimburse  claimant   for  one-half  month's   rent
   (November  16-30).   Similarly,  rent  for  December  reflects  a
   reimbursable lease-breaking expense.  The record reveals that the
   loss of  the  security  deposit was  not  an  unavoidable  lease-
   breaking expense.   Rather,  the claimant  incurred that  expense
   because  he  failed  to  leave  the  apartment in  an  acceptable
   condition.    Such  an  expense  is  not  reimbursable  under the
   regulations.   Therefore,  the claimant  is  entitled to  recover
   $1275 ($425 + $850).
 
        In  terms of  being reimbursed  under  a theory  of TQSE,  a
   fundamental prerequisite to recovery is lacking: the claimant was
   never in temporary  quarters and incurred no TQSE.   The claimant
   remained  at the  apartment  at  the old  duty  station until  he
   relocated to a newly purchased residence at the new duty station.
   What  claimant  may have  done,  but  did  not do,  in  terms  of
   occupying  temporary quarters  is not  relevant to the  matter of
   reimbursement.   Having occupied no temporary quarters and having
   incurred no TQSE, the claimant has demonstrated no entitlement to
   TQSE reimbursement.  JTR C14001-F.1.
 
 
                                 ____________________________
                                 JOSEPH A. VERGILIO
                                 Board Judge