Road Runner/Prime Logistics - Woodstock, ON

Status
Not open for further replies.
Agree 100% on all of those points.

The only reason why it's worse for a carrier to broker freight unknowingly rather than a broker carrier agreements with customers and broker agreements spell out liability terms differently. If someone acts as a carrier and really brokers freight, the indemnifications and other liabilities should anything go wrong are nowhere. I don't agree with co-brokering in cases other than what I illustrated below, and definitely not double brokering by a broker. The 'double broker' deals out there are more often than not those where the last broker has misrepresented itself as a carrier.
 
QueenD, a carrier can legally broker freight to another carrier or to anyone he likes, as long a he is registered to do so. In other words, if he is a licensed US Property Broker which includes having a 75K surety bond on file. There is nothing illegal about a carrier, or a broker who sells freight to another broker, provided they are licensed to do so. When freight moves from one broker (carrier acting as a broker or stand alone broker) to another broker, it is commonly referred to as double brokering or co-brokering. Not an illegal activity, just one that I believe is too risky and not worthy of a professional freight broker.
 
  • Like
Reactions: QueenD
QueenD said:
Again help me understand.

1. Its ok for a broker to co-broker to another broker

BUT

2. Its NOT ok for a carrier to broker to another carrier...

Am i folowing this right?
Click to expand...


No it is not okay but lots of it is being done. I call it double brokering because that is what it is. Co-brokering is a term dreamed up to make it sound better.

A carrier can broker excess direct customer freight to another carrier (if he has all the proper authorities to do so) or like in most cases just done to move the freight and keep trucks busy and customers happy.
Some of the brokers on here will jump up and down scream and yell if a carrier brokers a direct customer load(usually the co-brokers) and does not have broker authority. In the grand scheme of things broker authority ain't worth shit as the 75 k bond that is needed to be a stand up broker won't even pay a weeks worthy of invoices for any broker of any size if they go down.
 
  • Like
Reactions: QueenD
Rob said:
No it is not okay but lots of it is being done. I call it double brokering because that is what it is. Co-brokering is a term dreamed up to make it sound better.

A carrier can broker excess direct customer freight to another carrier (if he has all the proper authorities to do so) or like in most cases just done to move the freight and keep trucks busy and customers happy.
Some of the brokers on here will jump up and down scream and yell if a carrier brokers a direct customer load(usually the co-brokers) and does not have broker authority. In the grand scheme of things broker authority ain't worth shit as the 75 k bond that is needed to be a stand up broker won't even pay a weeks worthy of invoices for any broker of any size if they go down.
Click to expand...


Thank you for the clarification!
 
You're right, current regulations regarding the limit of a brokers surety bond are probably too low. However, it bothers me that many brokers and carriers pay the premium to maintain the 75K bond while some carriers and other brokers elect to ignore it. It creates an unleveled playing field. Sure, it may not be perfect, but at least it offers some protection when a licensed carrier or broker goes down. More importantly, I think it shows a commitment to other members of the industry that you are serious about your profession and are playing by the rules. There seems to be as many complaints about non-paying carriers who broker freight, as there are complaints about stand alone brokers not paying their bills. A carrier selling his "excess freight", just to get it moved, keep the trucks busy and the customer happy, sounds pretty much like what I and every other broker out there does on a daily basis. It's called freight brokering.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MikeJr
The broker authority and bond was meant as a pledge by the broker community saying 'I've got some skin in the game' and being serious about the industry. But it's not a license to be a dumb-ass about it, you still need to make sure that reward is worth risk as far as who you're dealing with. And it's also up to us to police it as to whether people are playing by the rules or not ... and if they're not, just say no. Sadly, it seems that too many people are in reactive mode too much of the time and this is why freight ends up being handled by some of these jokers.
 
Can the shipper/ receiver refuse to not pay the carrier that moved the freight? Can a small claims lawsuit not solve this?
 
The matter needs to be escalated. If the person who was acting as the 'traffic manager' doesn't play ball, just move up the chain. More than likely the company will settle it before it gets to court.
 
Some great points below (some off topic for the thread, but a great read).

In short, the shipper/consignee can be forced by lawsuit to pay again to an actual transporting carrier (there's tons of case law in Canada) even if they have already paid another party. Manufacturers need to know who they are letting handle their shipments and if not a legitimate entity who pays carriers who perform the actual move then they can be stung in this way. I'll hold my comments on what constitutes a 'legal brokerage' as there are several other threads about this topic.

Regarding co/rebrokering. I'll attempt a short version but have a feeling it'll get a little out of hand: if everyone involved with a shipment is aware and approves of the way it's being handled why should it matter how many hands it passes through? Broker #1, broker #2, carrier #1, carrier #2, furtherance provider for pickup, furtherance provider for delivery... If you take the time to really scope out all LTL moves (cross border) there are quite a few companies who are set up with furtherance providers for local P&D at one or both ends, they move the lineahaul or sometimes broker out the consolidation, etc... Anyone who thinks the truck that picks up in Sudbury ON is the same truck/trailer combo that delivers 1 skid to Laredo TX (as LTL) has some to learn. Sometimes those different trucks/trailers are owned by different companies too. What's important is open, honest communication with your supplier and customer as to what part we all play and what part others are providing to me. I love giving freight to Polaris, they do a great job but as we all know they have furtherance providers for some areas in the USA and some areas of Canada. For the record - I've not asked for Polaris Broker Bond information and I trust that their review of their furtherance provider is as stringent or more so than my own qualification process for new/review of carriers we tender freight to. Conversely, I do not want a TL from TX I'm booking as team service rebrokered without my permission to a friend of a friend of a carrier that I gave the load to who I just set up as a new carrier in my system.

On topic:
Road Runner is not a customer of ours so I've not taken a load from them. I can't tell you how they pay.
 
  • Like
Reactions: htcollections
Mike,

Cool read and Roadrunner is a carrier not a broker. Based in Woodstock they do local flatbed. Not sure if they run US or not.

The more hands it passes through the less there is in the pot for the poor bastard doing the work and laying out the cash for the equipment to do it. That is my only problem with it all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Salma and hauling_ass
One other point to consider is this: as a carrier, we do not always know when freight has been co-brokered, or double brokered etc. This runs us into a problem when there are accessorial charges, or delays, or miscommunications. We are always on the losing end. Broker A doesn't care about my waiting time, nor does broker B. Nobody can solve a problem when it arises because no one is really willing to take responsibility. They sure are ready to take their cut of the rate, but aside from matching truck to load they have little to no ability to problem solve when the need arises.
 
It's unfortunate Chica123, that all of your contact with brokers has been so negative. Maybe it's time to start dealing with a better class of freight broker, they are out there, in fact quite a few of them are on this site. Too bad that a thread that started as a discussion about what a carrier can do in the event of non payment had to take a step in the wrong direction with broad brush, misplaced comments such as yours. I am always amazed at how quickly any discussion such as this seems to deteriorate into a" slimy, cheating brokers all bad....poor, overworked carriers all good". It only took about 8 hours today!
 
  • Like
Reactions: MikeJr and ShawnR
WALTERK said:
So, how does one make sure that they will get paid? No, I am not taking about establishing a good relationship with your customer, checking Equifax, credit application, Load link score, and all the due diligence. I am taking about the protection that the carrier can secure in case of things going sour. In other words: "How can you secure the credit that you extent to another party?". In the spirit of educating each other, would some of the more established carriers share their credit policies, please". Yes, there will be always fools that will cut corners, but in the end they won't be able to go a long distance and will crush and burn as they should. Thank you in advance for sharing.
Click to expand...

How about credit insurance? It covers bankruptcy AND protracted payment, as long as you can demonstrate that there was no dispute. It's not cheap on low volumes, but if you factor, they MIGHT be able to add this on.
 
Key Factor. What is your position on factoring companies purchasing invoices, only later to learn the clients double brokered the load? Is the factoring company responsible after demanding payment? Do factoring companies ensure the invoices they purchase from their clients are not double brokered? This seems to be a little tricky?
 
Loaders... I am not sure how you read that out of my post. I am referring to those who double-broker or co-broker freight. This scenario creates a unique situation in which neither party is willing to solve a problem when it arises. Those who double broker should not be confused with the vast majority of great brokers out there. But believe me, when I find out someone has double brokered me a load, it is likely the last time I will deal with them.
 
Rob said:
Mike,

Cool read and Roadrunner is a carrier not a broker. Based in Woodstock they do local flatbed. Not sure if they run US or not.

The more hands it passes through the less there is in the pot for the poor bastard doing the work and laying out the cash for the equipment to do it. That is my only problem with it all.
Click to expand...

So, if I give you a TL from city A to city B and pay you your rate to do the load. You picked up and delivered with spectacular service (you never let us down), how does the number of hands in the pot matter? I'm not sure I get it... Maybe I should have a 3rd coffee! :)

Keep well sir,
Mike
 
  • Like
Reactions: ShawnR
I'm more pissed off as the customer ultimately paying the freight than if I was a carrier in the manner you speak. It ends up being a situation where one is paying more to get inferior service ... inferior because information is too slow. The whole reason why there are many shippers out there who don't want to work with someone with no assets is because of the lack of visibility. The big brokers have come up with some unique ways to enhance visibility of brokered shipments but smaller ones don't have the resources to do this from an IT standpoint.

You can go on about how big LTL carriers interline shipments through to destination, but ... if you listen to customers who complain about the LTL service, it's mostly an issue where things are inconsistent and there isn't visibility. Otherwise, no freaking way shippers would use the carrier base doing LTL by skidlot to move 1 or 2 skids, especially when lightweight ... by price we get spanked.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom