On a bill of lading, “said to contain” is a notation telling everyone downstream that the carrier accepted a sealed container or package based on the shipper’s description, without opening, counting, or verifying what’s inside. Under federal law, that short phrase shifts the evidentiary burden for shortages or misdescription onto the shipper and makes cargo claims significantly harder to win.
What the Notation Actually Does
A bill of lading normally works as a receipt. It confirms the carrier took in specific goods, in a specific quantity, in a specific condition. A clean bill is prima facie evidence that the carrier received exactly what the document describes.1Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 46 USC 30703 – Bills of Lading
Add “said to contain” (often abbreviated STC) and the document stops confirming the contents. It acknowledges only that the carrier received a sealed unit the shipper described a certain way. The carrier is not vouching for what’s inside. The same legal function is carried by related phrases like “shipper’s weight, load, and count” and “contents or condition of contents of packages unknown.” The Federal Bill of Lading Act treats them as interchangeable qualifiers, and the Uniform Commercial Code follows the same logic.2Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 49 USC 80113 – Liability for Nonreceipt, Misdescription, and Improper Loading3Legal Information Institute. Uniform Commercial Code 7-301 – Liability for Nonreceipt or Misdescription One wrinkle: “shipper’s weight, load, and count” also signals that the shipper did the loading, so it carries extra protection against claims caused by improper loading that “said to contain” alone doesn’t.
Why Carriers Use It
The usual setting is a shipper-loaded container. Goods get packed at a private warehouse, a bolt seal goes on, and the driver takes custody of a box whose interior nobody at the carrier has seen. The driver can record the seal number and the container’s external condition. Verifying the stated 500 televisions actually inside would require breaking the seal, which defeats the point of sealing it.
The same reasoning applies to shrink-wrapped pallets, multi-layered crates, and anything where the individual items can’t be seen from outside. Under the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act, a carrier isn’t obligated to put quantity or weight on the bill when it had “no reasonable means of checking” the shipper’s figures.4Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 46 USC 30701 – Definition
There is a real limit on this. The notation has to be truthful. If a carrier inspected and counted a shipment and still stamps “said to contain” on the bill, the protection doesn’t apply. The premise of the phrase is genuine lack of knowledge; without that, it’s just paper.3Legal Information Institute. Uniform Commercial Code 7-301 – Liability for Nonreceipt or Misdescription
How Liability Shifts for Domestic Shipments
For freight moving overland in the United States, the Federal Bill of Lading Act (the Pomerene Act) sets the baseline. A carrier is generally liable for damages from nonreceipt or misdescription. That liability falls away when three things line up: the shipper loaded the goods, the bill includes a qualifier like “said to contain,” and the carrier genuinely doesn’t know whether the contents match the description.2Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 49 USC 80113 – Liability for Nonreceipt, Misdescription, and Improper Loading
The Carmack Amendment, which governs motor carriers and freight forwarders in interstate commerce, holds carriers liable for “actual loss or injury to the property” in their possession.5Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 49 USC 14706 – Liability of Carriers Under Receipts and Bills of Lading To win, a shipper has to prove three things: the goods were delivered to the carrier in good condition, they arrived damaged or short, and the dollar amount of the loss. A clean bill of lading normally proves the first element on its own. With “said to contain” on the document, that shortcut is gone, and you need independent proof the goods were in the container at handoff.
How Liability Shifts for Ocean Shipments
For international ocean cargo, COGSA applies. It requires the carrier to issue a bill of lading showing packages, quantity, or weight “as furnished in writing by the shipper,” but the carrier doesn’t have to include details it has “reasonable ground for suspecting” are inaccurate or has “had no reasonable means of checking.”4Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 46 USC 30701 – Definition A COGSA bill is prima facie evidence of receipt of the described goods,1Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 46 USC 30703 – Bills of Lading but a “said to contain” qualifier knocks out that presumption for anything the carrier couldn’t independently verify.
When the Notation Has No Effect
Federal law carves out two situations where stamping “said to contain” or “shipper’s weight, load, and count” on the bill does nothing for the carrier.2Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 49 USC 80113 – Liability for Nonreceipt, Misdescription, and Improper Loading
The first is carrier-loaded goods. When the carrier itself loads the shipment, it has to count packages for package freight or determine kind and quantity for bulk freight. The qualifier is meaningless in that setting, with one narrow exception: the carrier is still not responsible for freight concealed inside other packages.
The second is bulk freight when the shipper has adequate weighing facilities available. If the shipper asks in writing, the carrier has to determine the kind and quantity of the freight, and writing “shipper’s weight” on the bill doesn’t override that duty.
Both carve-outs track the same idea. The notation only protects a carrier that genuinely couldn’t check. When the carrier had the goods in hand or had the scales to weigh them, the protection falls away.
What the Shipper Guarantees in Exchange
The notation protects the carrier, and it also puts the shipper on the hook. By providing the descriptions on the bill of lading, the shipper guarantees their accuracy: marks, number, quantity, and weight. If the descriptions are wrong, the shipper must indemnify the carrier for losses, damages, and expenses the error causes.
The exposure escalates sharply if hazardous materials are involved. Every shipper offering hazmat for transport must certify that it’s properly classified, described, packaged, marked, and labeled.6eCFR. 49 CFR 172.204 – Shipper’s Certification Misdeclaring hazardous contents can trigger civil penalties up to $102,348 per violation, rising to $238,809 if the violation causes death, serious injury, or substantial property destruction. Willful or knowing violations can bring up to five years in prison, or ten years when the violation causes a hazmat release that results in death or bodily injury.7eCFR. 49 CFR Part 209 Subpart B – Hazardous Materials Penalties
Winning a Cargo Claim Despite the Notation
“Said to contain” makes recovery harder, not impossible. Because the bill no longer proves what was inside, you have to build the proof somewhere else. You need independent evidence of three things: the goods went into the container, they were in good condition, and the loss happened while the carrier had custody.
- Certified third-party weight tickets at origin. If a loaded container weighs 18,000 pounds at pickup and 14,000 at delivery, something is missing regardless of what the bill says.
- Detailed packing lists signed by warehouse supervisors, with serial or lot numbers that tie specific items to the shipment.
- Time-stamped photographs or continuous video of the loading process and the seal being applied.
- Seal integrity records tracking the bolt seal’s unique number from origin to destination. An intact original seal at delivery cuts against a shortage claim; a broken or substituted seal supports one.
- Independent cargo surveys for high-value or bulk shipments. In bulk shipping, draft surveys measuring the vessel’s displacement before and after loading are treated as strong evidence of quantity received.
No single document replaces the bill of lading’s evidentiary weight. Together, they can establish the same facts: the weight ticket shows mass went in, the packing list identifies what it was, the seal record and video show when and how access occurred.
Deadlines That Will End Your Claim
Evidence-gathering has to fit inside strict time limits, and missing them forfeits the claim entirely.
For domestic shipments under Carmack, a carrier cannot require claims to be filed in less than nine months after delivery. Once the carrier denies all or part of the claim in writing, you have at least two years from the date of that denial to sue.5Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 49 USC 14706 – Liability of Carriers Under Receipts and Bills of Lading A settlement offer alone doesn’t start that two-year clock. The carrier has to explicitly state in writing that it’s denying part of the claim and explain why.
For ocean shipments under COGSA, the window is tighter. The carrier is discharged from all liability unless suit is filed within one year after the goods were delivered or should have been delivered.4Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 46 USC 30701 – Definition There’s no preliminary claim-filing step. You litigate inside the year or lose the right. With “said to contain” already weakening your evidentiary position, start documenting the moment a shortage or misdescription surfaces.