The questions independent drinks founders ask most — answered. Distilled from years of community knowledge so the good stuff never disappears in the feed again.
Members view freight forwarder responsibility through a **duty-of-care lens rooted in the contract terms**. The consensus is that you engage a forwarder to deliver goods from A to B at an agreed price; they should handle routing decisions without incurring you unexpected costs, or be transparent about potential charges upfront. **Key principle:** - Members expect forwarders to understand and plan around country-specific regulations that affect their chosen routing. If a forwarder selects a transshipment port (e.g. Hong Kong for alcohol shipments), they should anticipate regulatory requirements like stamping obligations for spirits over 30% ABV and either absorb the cost or disclose it before booking. **In the specific case cited:** - A shipment of 2 pallets (UK to China) was transshipped through Hong Kong without the shipper's knowledge. - Hong Kong regulations required all bottles of alcohol over 30% ABV to be stamped with HKDNP. - The forwarder charged £3,200 for a third-party stamping service, informing the shipper only 3 days before arrival in Hong Kong. - The shipper did not agree to these charges and instructed the forwarder to find another solution, but the forwarder proceeded anyway. - **Members suggested the forwarder should bear responsibility** for this arrangement, since they chose the routing without disclosure and the shipper had no opportunity to consent to either the transshipment or the cost. **Caveats:** - Disclosure on the sea waybill was raised as a potential best-practice question, though the excerpts do not resolve whether it is a formal obligation. - Some complexity exists depending on whether the forwarder's contract terms explicitly reserve the right to choose routing; however, members leaned toward interpreting "ship from A to B at price X" as an implied obligation to avoid hidden regulatory costs.