B737-200 ACFT WAS DAMAGED AFTER A CATERING TRUCK HIT THE ACFT HARD ENOUGH TO DENT THE FUSELAGE SIDE.

Narrative

WE HAD AN ACFT FOR 3 LEGS. THE FO PREFLTED THE ACFT ON THE FIRST LEG. UPON ARR FROM THE FIRST LEG I WENT DOWNSTAIRS AND DID A WALKAROUND OF THE ACFT THEN WENT TO OPS TO RETRIEVE THE PAPERWORK. THERE WAS AN EXTENSIVE AREA OF DOCUMENTED DAMAGE TO THE AFT PORTION OF THE ACFT THAT I NOTICED AT THAT TIME. I RETURNED TO THE ACFT AND BEGAN SETUP FOR THE NEXT LEG AND FELT A BUMP AS THE TUG HOOKED UP WHILE I WAS IN THE COCKPIT. I LATER STEPPED OUT OF THE COCKPIT AND A FLT ATTENDANT REMARKED THAT IT FELT LIKE SOMETHING HAD BUMPED INTO THE AIRPLANE. I SAID SOMETHING TO THE EFFECT THAT THE TUG WAS HERE. HE LAUGHED AND WE CONTINUED WITH OUR DUTIES. WE FLEW TO DALLAS AND I AGAIN DID A WALKAROUND; BUT NOTICED THAT A COUPLE OF THE DENTS ON THE AFT OF THE ACFT SEEMED A LITTLE LARGER THAN I REMEMBERED. ON FURTHER INSPECTION THIS AREA DID HAVE A NUMBER OF DENTS AND A LOT OF DOCUMENTATION MARKS WERE WORN AND FADED; WHICH IS FAIRLY COMMON. I STILL FELT THAT THE DENTS WERE DOCUMENTED BUT THAT THE MARKS WERE WORN AND THERE WAS A MARK THAT APPEARED TO COINCIDE WITH THE AREA. I RETURNED TO DENVER AND POINTED THE AREA OUT TO THE MECHS TO HAVE THE MARKS REPAINTED. I WAS INFORMED THAT HE DID NOT BELIEVE THAT THE DENTS IN QUESTION WERE DOCUMENTED. WHEN I RETURNED TO THE COCKPIT I ASKED THE FO IF HE HAD NOTICED ANYTHING UNUSUAL ON HIS WALKAROUND. AT THAT TIME THE FLT ATTENDANT; WHO HAD REMARKED ABOUT THE BUMP; OVERHEAD OUR CONVERSATION AND STATED THAT IT WAS PROBABLY FROM THE CATERING TRUCK THAT HAD BUMPED INTO THE ACFT WHILE I WAS OFF THE ACFT TO RETRIEVE PAPERWORK ON OUR EARLIER LEG THROUGH DENVER. STILL FURTHER DISCUSSION FOUND THAT A MECH HAD BEEN SVCING THE #2 ENG WHEN IN HIS WORDS 'THE ACFT STARTED JUMPING ALL OVER THE PLACE.' UNFORTUNATELY THE ERRORS IN THIS EVENT WERE TOO NUMEROUS AND EMBARRASSING TO COUNT; BUT THE KEY FAILURES WERE: 1) THE CATERING DRIVER'S FAILURE TO RPT HIS MISTAKE; 2) MY FAILURE TO BE SURE IN THE FIRST CONVERSATION WITH THE FLT ATTENDANT WHAT EXACTLY WAS MEANT INSTEAD OF ASSUMING THAT THE BUMP WAS THE SAME ONE I HAD FELT WHILE IN THE COCKPIT; 3) THE FLT ATTENDANT'S FAILURE TO CLARIFY WHEN IT WAS APPARENT THAT I HAD A DIFFERENT IDEA OF WHAT WAS MEANT; 4) THE MECH FOR NOT INVESTIGATING THE UNUSUAL MOVEMENT OF THE ACFT WHILE SVCING; 5) MYSELF AGAIN FOR NOT ASSURING; CONFERRING WITH MAINT ON FIRST DISCOVERY TO DETERMINE THE TRUE NATURE OF THE DAMAGE; AND 6) A POLICY OF MARKING DAMAGED AREAS WITH PAINT AND THEN ALLOWING IT TO FADE OR WEAR OFF TO THE POINT OF WHERE IT IS NOT READILY IDENTIFIABLE BEFORE REMARKED. I PERSONALLY WILL CHANGE MY OP BY FIRST TRYING TO ASSURE MORE EFFECTIVE COM. SECONDLY; I HAVE ALWAYS PERFORMED A WARLKAROUND UPON ARR TO TRY TO PREVENT POSSIBLE DELAY BY DISCOVERING PROBS EARLY. IT IS APPARENT NOW THAT A SECOND 'LAP' SHOULD BE PERFORMED TO DISCOVER ANY PROBS THAT MAY HAVE OCCURRED WHILE AWAY FROM THE ACFT. AND THIRD; BY NOT DEPARTING IF THERE IS AN ITEM THAT COULD OR SHOULD BE QUESTIONABLE IN MY MIND.