How to Stop Double Brokerage

[frtbrkr]

Hi Carriers

I use to have a let of empathy for carriers who didn't got paid by the "Double Brokers". At the end of the day, it's their truck, their driver, their fuel and insurance which hauled the freight, they deserved to get paid.

I recently - however - lost that empathy, i would like to ask carriers to help me get it back.

It's my understanding, that the carriers know when they P/U the freight, that it's given to them by another carrier, they know their customer isn't honest to the shipper/receiver or to the real "load broker". The temptation for money leads them to look sideways and enable the "Double Broker" to continue with their shady business model.

In most cases, the carrier which hauls the freight knows that something isn't right. Most of the times, the "Double Broker" is telling them the Driver needs to ID himself as [Name of the Double Broker company], no real broker will ever ask for it, quite the opposite, most real honest Load Brokers will notify the shipper in advance as to which Carrier was hired for P/U. In others cases, the Double Broker will be the one issuing the PARS/PAPS # to avoid getting caught. There are other ways where the hauling carrier knows or senses that something is not straight, but chooses to look away. Once they are on the receiving-end of these crooks, it's then they are crying for help from the shipper/receiver or the real honest Load Broker.

You cant have the cake and eat it too, you are either operating with principal, value and honor or you don't!

Carriers, please help me change my view on this.

 

[Rob]

Hi Carriers

I use to have a let of empathy for carriers who didn't got paid by the "Double Brokers". At the end of the day, it's their truck, their driver, their fuel and insurance which hauled the freight, they deserved to get paid.

I recently - however - lost that empathy, i would like to ask carriers to help me get it back.

It's my understanding, that the carriers know when they P/U the freight, that it's given to them by another carrier, they know their customer isn't honest to the shipper/receiver or to the real "load broker". The temptation for money leads them to look sideways and enable the "Double Broker" to continue with their shady business model.

In most cases, the carrier which hauls the freight knows that something isn't right. Most of the times, the "Double Broker" is telling them the Driver needs to ID himself as [Name of the Double Broker company], no real broker will ever ask for it, quite the opposite, most real honest Load Brokers will notify the shipper in advance as to which Carrier was hired for P/U. In others cases, the Double Broker will be the one issuing the PARS/PAPS # to avoid getting caught. There are other ways where the hauling carrier knows or senses that something is not straight, but chooses to look away. Once they are on the receiving-end of these crooks, it's then they are crying for help from the shipper/receiver or the real honest Load Broker.

You cant have the cake and eat it too, you are either operating with principal, value and honor or you don't!

Carriers, please help me change my view on this.

Nice post great theory but most of these carriers are shady to say the least to start. Hence the driver inc model that most of them use. They all have sister, cousin companies ( their story) and would not know the truth if it walked up and kicked them in the nuts. Want to stop it quit giving them freight. Diver INC no load Sister Company showed up to load = no load. We had one called the actual broker and that broker could of cared less about it and not a fly by night broker a well respected name been around a long time but I must say they are getting more douchey all the time as well in last few years.

 

[frtbrkr]

Nice post great theory but most of these carriers are shady to say the least to start. Hence the driver inc model that most of them use. They all have sister, cousin companies ( their story) and would not know the truth if it walked up and kicked them in the nuts. Want to stop it quit giving them freight. Diver INC no load Sister Company showed up to load = no load. We had one called the actual broker and that broker could of cared less about it and not a fly by night broker a well respected name been around a long time but I must say they are getting more douchey all the time as well in last few years.

Thanks Rob.

Apparently, you are reinforcing my loss of empathy.

I'm looking for some to argue how i should get it back.

Any unit available?

 

[LrgCar]

Some brokers even want you checking in under their name, but I get it the whole PARS/PAPS thing is a bit shady. But we also work for some carriers who aren't double brokering the freight but clear all the PARS themselves because one load may have 20-30 PARS. It is really a case-by-case thing, most of the time it's very obvious that the freight is being double-brokered but other times it's not so clear. But to answer your question no I do not think the carrier is to be blamed for not being paid if you provide a service you should be paid, it does not matter if the party that hired you is doing the right thing or not.

 

[frtbrkr]

There are NO votes on my poll but no explanation as to why.

Weird, ha?

 

[frtbrkr]

Some brokers even want you checking in under their name, but I get it the whole PARS/PAPS thing is a bit shady. But we also work for some carriers who aren't double brokering the freight but clear all the PARS themselves because one load may have 20-30 PARS. It is really a case-by-case thing, most of the time it's very obvious that the freight is being double-brokered but other times it's not so clear. But to answer your question no I do not think the carrier is to be blamed for not being paid if you provide a service you should be paid, it does not matter if the party that hired you is doing the right thing or not.

Thanks for you response.

As a broker ourselves, we see no value of telling the carrier to ID with our name, there is no value to it unless the Broker is lying.

Please explain the 20-30 pars, i don't get it, not sure why that is and why the actual carrier cant do it.

If the actual carrier knows it's double Brokered, and they are still risking by the load, it would be wrong for them to hold possible other honest parties who didn't had a clue its going to be Doubled Brokers.

I don't mind of the actual Carrier getting paid, but if the shipper/receiver already paid the Broker and/or the Broker already paid the Double Broker, it would be fair for the actual Carrier to swallow the loss eat the consequences of "their choice".

Honest parties don't have to loose money or sleep due to the none-honest companies involved.

 

[LrgCar]

Thanks for you response.

As a broker ourselves, we see no value of telling the carrier to ID with our name, there is no value to it unless the Broker is lying.

Please explain the 20-30 pars, i don't get it, not sure why that is and why the actual carrier cant do it.

Having a carrier ID may not apply to you but we have had many broker request this, heck even Traffic tech wants it for some of their customers.

There are many reasons why the PARS would be setup beforehand for something like furniture loads, consolidated LTL etc. I don't think any carrier wants to clear 30 PARS with multiple brokers, in this case, the broker usually a carrier will set it up beforehand so there are no issues.

if the actual carrier knows it's double Brokered, and they are still risking by the load, it would be wrong for them to hold possible other honest parties who didn't had a clue its going to be Doubled Brokers.

I don't mind of the actual Carrier getting paid, but if the shipper/receiver already paid the Broker and/or the Broker already paid the Double Broker, it would be fair for the actual Carrier to swallow the loss eat the consequences of "their choice".

Honest parties don't have to loose money or sleep due to the none-honest companies involved.

What you are mentioning here ties into the BOL act, give it a read if you haven't already and I'm sure you'll understand. These unknowing innocent parties ie broker and shipper have a certain amount of due diligence that needs to be done on their end as well to verify who is hauling their freight. This isn't about what is right or wrong, this is about the law and the law states your shipper may have to pay twice if the delivery carrier is not paid. it's as simple as that and in a court of law it isn't up for debate, it's been done many times and in the end, it's the same result. Sure you may get some people agreeing with you on this forum but that's only opinions and in the court, only the law will matter so all these theories really have no meaning. We can go on and on about who should be to blame but in the end if your freight is double-brokered and you don't know you have failed to do your part wether that's cross-checking or educating your shippers and customer. Our shippers won't load anyone that isn't who we told them we are sending in, many shippers have no problem with this if it protects them from liability.

 

[Deisel1]

I remember not too long ago I would only have carriers pick up from my dock in order for me to track down all the double brokering at that time. That was when I got a first-hand glimpse of "my local guy DEF is my sister/brother's company" when they arrive. I heard it all. To this point, I just refused to load all trucks that were booked with another company regardless of the situation. If you were DEF but I booked with ABC, goodbye, you will not be loaded.

However, that doesn't mean ABC would pick up from the dock and then DB to another carrier until we would seal the trailer, not the trailer # on the BOL, and even that the power-only trick was used more than I can count. It was even harder with LTL.

That made us evaluate how we were booking and selling load. We would do our due diligence by vetting the carrier but still, some fell through the cracks. Downsizing our carrier pool has helped eliminate Double brokering for sure.

 

[frtbrkr]

Having a carrier ID may not apply to you but we have had many broker request this, heck even Traffic tech wants it for some of their customers.

There are many reasons why the PARS would be setup beforehand for something like furniture loads, consolidated LTL etc. I don't think any carrier wants to clear 30 PARS with multiple brokers, in this case, the broker usually a carrier will set it up beforehand so there are no issues.



What you are mentioning here ties into the BOL act, give it a read if you haven't already and I'm sure you'll understand. These unknowing innocent parties ie broker and shipper have a certain amount of due diligence that needs to be done on their end as well to verify who is hauling their freight. This isn't about what is right or wrong, this is about the law and the law states your shipper may have to pay twice if the delivery carrier is not paid. it's as simple as that and in a court of law it isn't up for debate, it's been done many times and in the end, it's the same result. Sure you may get some people agreeing with you on this forum but that's only opinions and in the court, only the law will matter so all these theories really have no meaning. We can go on and on about who should be to blame but in the end if your freight is double-brokered and you don't know you have failed to do your part wether that's cross-checking or educating your shippers and customer. Our shippers won't load anyone that isn't who we told them we are sending in, many shippers have no problem with this if it protects them from liability.

Great point - see link http://www.insidetransport.com/thre...ze-the-fin-fallout-of-double-brokerage.26896/

My thread wasn't so much about the law, it's more about empathy.

At our company when we farce a "Double Broker", i used i get frustrated to my core, and did everything in my power to help the actual carrier get paid.

Sometimes, the Invoice amount isn't enough money for the Actual carrier to suing in court, but i used my Power as the broker to assist the carrier in getting paid, w/o empathy i cant do that.

In addition, the Law in Quebec protects the shipper or the Fright Broker. with empathy, i would still do whatever i can to ensure they get paid, w/o empathy is a different sorry.

With respect to Traffic Tech, i dot know what they are doing it. We are in this business for over 25 years, never have we asked a carrier to ID our name, it's defying the whole purpose of our existence as Load Brokers. We don't hide from our customers that we are "Brokers", we are proud of it!.

All our PARS/PAPS# is done via the carriers. we have sensitive loads which needs to pre-clear before hand, it's done by the For-Hire Carrier. Consolidated shipments, done by the For-Hire Carriers.

if the Broker is doing their job as expected, the Shippers theirs and the Actual carrier not assisting when they see anyone lying, this whole issue would be laid to rest.

 

[loaders]

As location, location, location is the motto of the real estate business, relationship, relationship, relationship is or should be the motto of the freight brokerage business. It goes without saying that having solid business relationships with your carriers base will eliminate 90% of double brokering. You know your carriers, they know you, you’ve seen their trucks on the road, they have visited your office or vice versa. It seems to be the “never used them before“ carriers, or the guys who quote temptingly low on a lane that cause most of the trouble.Yes, something will fall through the cracks occasionally but if you reduce your carrier pool as much as possible, avoid taking in new carriers without a visit to the proctologists office first and most importantly, stay loyal to the guys that have helped you out and grow your business. They are in it for the long haul, not the smash and grab!

 

[frtbrkr]

I remember not too long ago I would only have carriers pick up from my dock in order for me to track down all the double brokering at that time. That was when I got a first-hand glimpse of "my local guy DEF is my sister/brother's company" when they arrive. I heard it all. To this point, I just refused to load all trucks that were booked with another company regardless of the situation. If you were DEF but I booked with ABC, goodbye, you will not be loaded.

However, that doesn't mean ABC would pick up from the dock and then DB to another carrier until we would seal the trailer, not the trailer # on the BOL, and even that the power-only trick was used more than I can count. It was even harder with LTL.

That made us evaluate how we were booking and selling load. We would do our due diligence by vetting the carrier but still, some fell through the cracks. Downsizing our carrier pool has helped eliminate Double brokering for sure.

Vary much valid points @Deisel1

Let's agree that it can work on FTL

LTL under 5 skids is usually booked with large reputable common-carriers, there is no issue of DB'age when they use their interline carriers for local P/U or delivery.

PTL (Partial Truck loads) i don't think there is much DB there but i would consider it the same as FTL, in the sense that the shipper shouldn't load it ONLY if the name we gave them is on the truck. AND the Actual Carrier shouldn't take it knowing it's double Brokered freight.

Narrowing down the pool of carriers is a good way of protecting you, but it's never ending battle + you are loosing good carriers in the process as well + the freight can still be double brokered.

Holding the shipper liable is one way + not having the slightest empathy for the Actual Carrier like mentioned above.

 

[MLCAR]

I'm glad Traffic Tech was mentioned, they were the first name that popped up in my head when reading this. I sorta understand why they need us to identify under "Traffic Tech" since their customer knows them and not us. We had a situation where we picked up from a shipper who had multiple outbounds for the day. They loaded us with something going no where near our destination. Turns out they got confused because we identified under "Melroy" and not "Traffic Tech" (who cares about PO#'s or my driver stating the delivery location right smh).

 

[frtbrkr]

As location, location, location is the motto of the real estate business, relationship, relationship, relationship is or should be the motto of the freight brokerage business. It goes without saying that having solid business relationships with your carriers base will eliminate 90% of double brokering. You know your carriers, they know you, you’ve seen their trucks on the road, they have visited your office or vice versa. It seems to be the “never used them before“ carriers, or the guys who quote temptingly low on a lane that cause most of the trouble.Yes, something will fall through the cracks occasionally but if you reduce your carrier pool as much as possible, avoid taking in new carriers without a visit to the proctologists office first and most importantly, stay loyal to the guys that have helped you out and grow your business. They are in it for the long haul, not the smash and grab!

Easier said then done when, when a ,loyal customer has a lane you don't do often, or if it's a late Friday P/U and assisting on getting it picked up TODAY, or new customer with a new lane.

In those situations, you go on the LINK because you have no choice, it's why the Customer comes to us, to help then "find" trucks.

What the shipper should do is explained on the other thread i opened, my issue here is that i dont feel bad anymore for the actual carrier, period.

 

[MLCAR]

I really don't understand the "no empathy for the carrier" comment. As others have mentioned and established its common practice for brokerages to have carrier's identify as them for a plethora of reasons. There's a level of good faith a carrier has to exercise when hauling freight, since we are not paid upfront or soon after our services are rendered. So when a carrier is ultimately "frauded" out of payment, there should be a level of empathy. Here's a great way to fix the whole double brokering debacle: PAY YOUR CARRIERS WITH BETTER TERMS its going to be 2023 in a few weeks, and we know your customers pay you in NET 10/ Net15....start paying your carriers in NET 20 see how fast the double brokers fall off. Any sensible carrier will choose a broker that pays quicker over a shady outfit with payment terms of 45 days or more.

 

[frtbrkr]

I'm glad Traffic Tech was mentioned, they were the first name that popped up in my head when reading this. I sorta understand why they need us to identify under "Traffic Tech" since their customer knows them and not us. We had a situation where we picked up from a shipper who had multiple outbounds for the day. They loaded us with something going no where near our destination. Turns out they got confused because we identified under "Melroy" and not "Traffic Tech" (who cares about PO#'s or my driver stating the delivery location right smh).

the solution is:

- I'm "Melroy" picking up on behalf of TT
- I'm "Melroy" picking up PO# 123
- I'm "Melroy" picking up freight going to XYZ Destination

There are other ways to ID freight.

lying is what makes all this shenanigan's possible, if honest people will standup and shame, Brokers, shippers, carriers who are not honest, thinks may hopefully fall into place.

TT is much bigger then us, but we don't needs their lectures how do conduct Brokerage, we are dong this for 25 years, ALWAYS HONEST TO ALL PARTIES.

in fact, we turned away other Freight Brokers who want to give us certain business, they've asked us to bill and them and they will bill their customers, we said NO, we want to be on control of the shipments all along, all we can is to give them a commission by check by the of the month for bring us "their" customers, they refused!

We don't need the business, if we can be honest to all parties.

There is a legitimate role for a Broker in the supply chain. any party who doesn't understand should step out of the way.

 

[loaders]

I agree with what you’re saying. Any carrier that has been in this industry for longer than a few months can tell, or at least suspect when a shipment is being double brokered. A load paying substantially more than it should being offered from some unknown entity, should be the big clue. Taking too long for the interchange of information. If the double broker doesn’t know the loading hours or who the customs broker is right off the bat, that too should be a warning sign. I get it, we have all been in that Friday afternoon crunch where your usually carrier bailed for some reason and now you’re scrambling to recover the load. Those situations demand extra attention to detail and trying to enlist the shippers help so you can have “eyes on the ground”. It isn’t a matter of “feeling bad” for the actual carrier because if they play their cards right and employ an experienced paralegal, they will get paid in a non payment double broker situation. If you’re going to feel bad for anyone, feel for the broker who got burned and will most likely have to pay for the same load twice.

 

[frtbrkr]

I really don't understand the "no empathy for the carrier" comment. As others have mentioned and established its common practice for brokerages to have carrier's identify as them for a plethora of reasons. There's a level of good faith a carrier has to exercise when hauling freight, since we are not paid upfront or soon after our services are rendered. So when a carrier is ultimately "frauded" out of payment, there should be a level of empathy. Here's a great way to fix the whole double brokering debacle: PAY YOUR CARRIERS WITH BETTER TERMS its going to be 2023 in a few weeks, and we know your customers pay you in NET 10/ Net15....start paying your carriers in NET 20 see how fast the double brokers fall off. Any sensible carrier will choose a broker that pays quicker over a shady outfit with payment terms of 45 days or more.

Common practice for False ID as as common as DB and both are wrong, Both are designed to defraud others. I have yet to hear a valid reasons for false ID at pickup.

a Broker (any type of Broker, not only in Transport) is to connect 2 other parties. A Broker who asks one party to predated they the Broker, is not doing their job faithfully.

In terms of payment, it's not the topic of hand, so i should comment, but i will.

We pay our carriers by 30 days latest, some earlier. Do you wanna to see our A/R? You will be shocked.


I'm not complaining, facing cash flow issues is something which i embrace as a business owner, but don't think for a second that our customers are paying earlier then we pay the carriers, it's far from it.

BACK TO EMPATHY.

 

[frtbrkr]

I agree with what you’re saying. Any carrier that has been in this industry for longer than a few months can tell, or at least suspect when a shipment is being double brokered. A load paying substantially more than it should being offered from some unknown entity, should be the big clue. Taking too long for the interchange of information. If the double broker doesn’t know the loading hours or who the customs broker is right off the bat, that too should be a warning sign. I get it, we have all been in that Friday afternoon crunch where your usually carrier bailed for some reason and now you’re scrambling to recover the load. Those situations demand extra attention to detail and trying to enlist the shippers help so you can have “eyes on the ground”. It isn’t a matter of “feeling bad” for the actual carrier because if they play their cards right and employ an experienced paralegal, they will get paid in a non payment double broker situation. If you’re going to feel bad for anyone, feel for the broker who got burned and will most likely have to pay for the same load twice.

lol

I am the Broker, I'm dealing with the legal component quite well...

There are so many threads here where Carriers are complaining that DB's are not paying them, the purpose of this thread to remove any feelings for them.

Unless they explain us why we should feel for them.

legality aside, any ethical reason why the Load broker or the shipper should to pay twice when you knew quit well whom you are dealing with?

You knew it's a DB shipment, eat it up.

 

[generalkonrad]

The word of the day is : empathy

 

[MikeJr]

Let me get this straight....

frtbrkr, you are saying that the carrier that hauled a re-brokered load where the entity that gave them the load has no intention to pay for the move - that they should have predicted it was a re-brokered shipment and either not taken the load or now that it's long delivered they should give up their right under the law to pursue claim for payment from the shipper because they should have known better? What are you smoking? My follow up question: please would you share some with me?

I try hard not to say inappropriate things to members here, but I'm kind of at a loss. I only had to involve myself in a half dozen or so shipments (in 10+ years) where there were additional parties involved and it was usually several months after delivery that the shit hits the fan... In all cases myself (the broker) paid the transporting carrier so our client didn't have to. My job (a legitimate freight broker) is literally to ensure all parties to the transaction are satisfied.

Keep well,
Mike