Schroeder Freight - Bankruptcy

So is it safe to assume that they are still operating? We are receiving their daily broadcasts with truck availability. It would be interesting to know what percentage of the loads they get are actually being hauled by their own equipment.
 
received an email from Schroeder Freight Inc., Winnipeg, MB files a «notice of intention to make a proposal» (NOI).....
 
Great news!!! So i am going to make a proposal to my Fuel and Insurance supplier and tell them i can only pay them 20% of my bill lets see what they say.
Let me get this right...Schroeder made us work, got paid, spent our money Foolishly and now they are proposing to pay me half??????
I will go after Schroeder Owners, Shippers, Receivers and their Dogs and i will get paid!!!
Message to the owners of Schroeder- This year when you put gifts under the tree for your kids let them know these are not from Santa, they are from the trucking companies we ROBBED!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rob and YYZRIDER
So my wife used to work at a place where the owner's mistress (who happened to have a high level position in the company) coerced her to buy her kids Christmas presents to the tune of maybe $3k. When she started asking for the monies owed she was fired, without cause.
Not kidding. It wasn't Schroeder freight, but the logic is the same so I feel like I should share. Con artists who profit from the hard working folk will get theirs, in this life or the next. The thing is, telling them truths like they are scum or whatever doesn't phase them, they are sociopaths to begin with. They just don't care.
If they 'restructure' and pay 100% of monies owed I will delete this post. I do hope they find a way to make things right, like many other companies who have had their struggles and have come out strong.

Keep well,
Mike
 
  • Like
Reactions: KeyFactor
Mike Jr., and all. We don't know the circumstances behind their failure, so we can't all pretend we don't get hit hard from time to time from deadbeat customers. The difference is, when we know we're getting hit hard, but choose to keep outsourcing to others who are trusting that their hard work will be compensated for as agreed. This industry is crappy sometimes. More often lately than I remember in recent memory. Being up against the wall and being open with your partners is one thing. You work together until everyone is back on their feet, but pawning off business to unsuspecting agents, and then to just pocket the receivables and flee...is the biggest slap in the face I can imagine in this industry. Carriers know how difficult it is to make a buck. So to be a carrier, and fleece other carriers is not forgiveable. Sorry Schroeder, you once had a great reputation. You can recover from bad debt, but you can't recover from screwing over your peers.
Thank you again to the IT team for keeping this board live and healthy.
I just made my annual contribution. To all, please do the same. We need to keep the lines of communication open to help minimize the downside in this industry
Happy holidays to all
Regards
Boss
 
  • Like
Reactions: Igor Galanter and loaders
I think it's possible they are dragged down by their asset based operations. The asset based part of them is much larger than the brokerage piece, I believe. Definitely sucks for those that have been stung.

I take it worse when a brokerage goes bankrupt because that is usually just a case of drawing too much out or living 'high on the hog' without the income to support it.

The people in the brokerage arm are going to be 'persona non grata' likely for a while and that may or may not be deserved ... I'm sure they knew something was coming but if they aren't owners, they are merely soldiers in the war.

I still say that the NOI is the better scenario ... likely once they've settled their debts Schroeder will sell out to a stalking horse buyer such as Titanium or maybe Celadon ... there are probably a few others too. I'm sure the brokerage will be toast though.
 
I'm sure that the first part is true ... though I don't know how much business the brokerage was actually doing in the grand scheme of things.

It's not much of a stretch to take customers along with you when the company goes broke and leaves the paying customers in a situation where they may have to pay some bills twice ... the salespeople will land but I'm sure not all of the accounts will follow with such a circumstance. I'm sure Brian has taken a position to start January and his note on the forum about stay tuned Dec 30 has something to do with this.
 
In some way, shape or form, monies must have been flowing from one division to keep the other afloat. Eventually, the flow of funds wasn't enough and it appears that the whole entity is being brought down. We are, as of today, still receiving their truck availability broadcasts, so the end isn't quite here yet. Is it safe to say that the brokerage "division" was not an actual separate company, just a clearing house for the loads the asset part couldn't handle? If that is the case, anyone owed money will not be able to rely on the required trust fund for Ontario based brokers, nor any recourse to the surety bond if the shipment was to or from the US.
 
Brian should stand with the Carriers and help them get paid, so wherever he goes next they will trust Brian and do business with him.
But that is not the case, Brian was let go from Traffic tech and BNSF and not on good terms.
So whoever decides to hire Brian should Really look at his Resume.
Way too much talk on this forum about how,why,where, end of the day, they Mismanaged their Money/Business and left way too many people hanging.
Fortunalty for us we have a lot of good clients and we will survive, but a guy called me yesterday and he had started a company with 2 trucks and he did a lot of work for Schroeder and now he has to explain to his kids why this Christmas wont be a happy one.
PS-Brain had told us on Wednesday he was coming to visit us, he has not showed up yet, I am guessing he changed his mind!!! GOOD MOVE BRIAN!!!
 
loaders said:
In some way, shape or form, monies must have been flowing from one division to keep the other afloat. Eventually, the flow of funds wasn't enough and it appears that the whole entity is being brought down. We are, as of today, still receiving their truck availability broadcasts, so the end isn't quite here yet. Is it safe to say that the brokerage "division" was not an actual separate company, just a clearing house for the loads the asset part couldn't handle? If that is the case, anyone owed money will not be able to rely on the required trust fund for Ontario based brokers, nor any recourse to the surety bond if the shipment was to or from the US.
Click to expand...
Asset based companies with brokerages typically do that ... but sometimes will take the freight they don't want to get to the freight they do want. But over the past several years many companies realized that they were getting better ROI on their brokerage than assets so they've focused their growth on non-asset based divisions. I can think of a handful just off the cuff that are that way ... to varying success.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Igor Galanter
htcollections said:
There may be many laws that can be relied on. TCRC can help you out. Your best bet is not to waist any time.
Click to expand...

Well I have just finished reviewing the 41 pages of unsecured creditors, mostly carriers. Here's the link

http://mnpdebt.ca/Style Library/MNP...oeder Freight Inc - NOI Creditor Package.pdf

It is a preliminary list, and does not cover ever carrier owed monies, nor correct amounts on those listed.
In the event that you are not familiar with NOI proceedings under the BIA Act, the unsecured creditors should by Jan 16/2017 receive a proposal to vote on (note however, that MNP, trustee for SFI, can seek an extention for another month or so.

For an NOI to be successful, 51% by number of creditors and 66.7% by dollar volume must approve the proposal - if either threshold is not met, SFI automatically is deemed bankrupt. Secured creditors are not affected by the NOI, and therefore do not have a vote.Within the spectrum of what's owed dollar-wise, the Trustee can create different classes. For example, MNP could include in the proposal that all unsecured creditors owed under $1000 will receive 100%, but those over $1000 will only receive 10%.
Remember, what they are trying to do is meet the thresholds previously mentioned.
Under an NOI, there is not a receiver appointed to collect the outstanding receivables of SFI - so SFI continues receiving money owed to SFI, deposit it, and carry on operations. The revenue keeps flowing in, without having to satisfy all those debts incurred prior to Dec 16. If you do work for SFI post-NOI, there is no guarantee that you will be paid, so BE CAUTIOUS. It's not like a traditional bankruptcy where a receiver is running the operation and you are guaranteed payment for work done post-NOI.

Where SFI had leases in place, either equipment or buildings, the lessors must continue providing the items covered by leases subject to agreed payment arrangements with SFI (usually it's cash in advance). SFI has the legal option to cancel or continue with leases.

Finally, this might be a case that the OTA should take up. They were the main force behind having the Ontario government introduce the broker trust account requirement back in 1992, and the main force in preserving it and having it re-appear in the Highway Traffic Act when the Truck Transportation Act was repealed. Per the BIA Act, trust monies are outside of the estate of the insolvent company.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hauling_ass and KeyFactor
Ahhhh..........but here is the rub. Was Schroeder Freight operating as a carrier, or as a broker? Obviously, from the extensive list of carriers named on the creditors list, it would seem that they were certainly acting like a broker. Or, were they merely selling off their "excess freight, you know, just to keep their customers happy"? Did the carriers on that list feel more secure offering credit to another carrier, as opposed to a broker? A question for Scamchaser. As Schroeder Freight was incorporated in Manitoba, can they be subject to the Ontario trust fund requirements? I would assume that if they were operating in Ontario, completing their contracts in Ontario, they would fall under the trust fund provisions.
 
loaders said:
Ahhhh..........but here is the rub. Was Schroeder Freight operating as a carrier, or as a broker? Obviously, from the extensive list of carriers named on the creditors list, it would seem that they were certainly acting like a broker. Or, were they merely selling off their "excess freight, you know, just to keep their customers happy"? Did the carriers on that list feel more secure offering credit to another carrier, as opposed to a broker? A question for Scamchaser. As Schroeder Freight was incorporated in Manitoba, can they be subject to the Ontario trust fund requirements? I would assume that if they were operating in Ontario, completing their contracts in Ontario, they would fall under the trust fund provisions.
Click to expand...
SFI operated Schroeder Logistics from different locations including an address on Matheson in Mississauga, so from a jurisdictional standpoint, they should have respected the Ontario trust account requirement. Every SFI load fax confirmation that I have seen lists either a Jessica, Atif or Cheryl, all with a 905 telephone #. There are other factors to be considered; however, on this open forum, I will not elaborate as one cannot be assured that SFI's principals are not monitoring.

On shipments where SFI did not touch the freight, they are a broker. This was affirmed in 2020494 Ontario Inc v Day & Ross Inc., a SCC case where I successfully represented the numbered company. The decision was appealed by D&R without success.

Although the CanLii citation is inaccurate, google 2020494 Ontario Day & Ross and you should find Justice McKenzie's appeal decision; however, a copy of the original SCC decision does not appear.
 
As I expected Scamchaser. Thank you for elaborating. Best wishes for the holidays to you and yours.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom