Double Brokers, Linehaulers, Co Brokers and Interliners


Well-Known Member
I know that in my past we've usually checked everything to verify who actually hauled the load. My last two companies did not but frankly, they weren't very strong at all. The biggest problem with double, triple brokering is liability. You have to know where the buck stops when something goes wrong. Not to mention that it creates a customer service network. The largest cost BY FAR in marketing freight whether it is an asset or non-asset based operation is the cost of acquiring customers (ie time invested) ... to screw it up by losing control of who is handling the freight is just BAD business.

This is why load confirmations and broker-carrier contracts stipulate that freight shall not be re-brokered.

When there is a real situation of interlining, the carrier that is given a shipment from a broker has an interline/interchange agreement with its interline partners that effectively treat shipments handled by their interline partners as if it's traveled on their own equipment. Something that LTL carriers like Manitoulin, Polaris etc have. But most of the little guys that are running this type of thing as a stealth operation have no such agreements, and again ... are precarious at best.

Again, some people may like what I'm saying, and others here may have steam coming out of their ears reading this ...
It is easier to track who moved the shipment via USA. It can be more difficult within Canada. Unless you have the shipper and receivers verifying who is actually picking up the load. Which is a good idea.

Freight Broker

Well-Known Member
As brokers we have very little control at the best of times. Why amplify that risk by involving more than one third party? Minimizing risk is always important. It doesn't take a committee to change a lightbulb and it shouldn't require one to move a load.


Site Supporter
Exactly the point I was trying to make yesterday. Why complicate something that doesn't need to be. As an owner of a business, risk management should be your primary concern. Picking up a few extra bucks by participating in a re-brokering scheme is too fraught with unnecessary risk to make it financial worthwhile. Most importantly, the risk involved in loosing a customer vastly outweighs any potential financial gain.
We deal with carriers and brokers we trust. obviously, the fewer involved the better, but we still choose to deal with not only carriers but brokers also. I guess the perfect world you describe would take out any broker, but we are fine with it.


Site Supporter
Not a perfect world, just a world where one broker deals with one carrier for one load. Nice and simple, one phone call for status reports, one bill from the company that actually hauled the freight, insurance certificate on file for the carrier that moved the load, no worries, no fuss, no mess. Load delivered? Good, let's move on to the next one. Wait a minute.....that almost sounds perfect.


Site Supporter
Don't engage in double/triple/co/re brokering and you too could have a place in this world. You will find that most carriers prefer this world as well.
And some carriers wont deal with brokers. I'm happy with our set up. We deal with long time carriers and brokers. rarely is there an issue, but its trucking so it does happen.


Site Supporter
I am still puzzled as to why brokers do so little research when entrusting their customers freight to an "unknown" carrier.
If it's the first time you get a call from an "unknown" carrier, definitely go to the FMCSA website, and see what you can find.

If the carrier has an MC/DOT number, then do a Safer search which will indicate how many trucks they have reported as a result of statistical filings.

If it only shows one truck..............................

Of course, if the carrier only offers domestic carriage, the FMCSA may not give you insight.

Also, if you are registered with the WSIB, you should do a company search for the carrier, to see if they are registered. Most scammers do not bother.
Your sentence is perfect describing sometimes how I feel when carriers complain about scammers, brokers double brokering, triple brokering, not geting paid, talking about going after the customers and Mercantile act. I will use the same sentence and wording , but just slightly different and we'll see if it makes sense:
I am puzzled as to why carriers do so little research when entrusting a "broker" they know nothing about simply because carrier need skids in trailer. And then after they find out it's a scammer, triple broker, bad credit (I find out that the worst are actual carriers reselling their overflow), they complain about the situation. I think our industry badly need more caution to be exerted on BOTH sides.


Members online
Guests online
Total visitors