Contracts

Yes, it is Michael. We had one sent to us the other day too. We do occasional work for them and are generally happy to do so. I'm not sure what to do with this agreement except to scratch out a couple of things.
 
We also got this Service Freight contract, I hadn't looked at it until I saw this post. My Sharpie will be getting a workout with this one.
 
Didn't someone above say they didn't have a US Bond ???
If so, it's not worth the paper it's written on re: Item 1, section A)

"WHEREAS BROKER is duly licensed in accordance with applicable Provincial, State and Federal law

and regulation..."

As for me personally, I wouldn't touch that with a 10 foot pole ... even with the amount of strike-outs I put into it ... LOL
 
We do small amount, have not seen "contract" but 2 options, I will cross out "items" or will not complete.
 
Does anyone see this agreement being used?

http://www.ntba-brokers.com/media/778/ntba_broker_carrier_agreement_v7_02.pdf

It seems less 'doom and gloom' and a little less one sided than the one presented lower in this thread. Of course we all know 'contracts' are only used to protect innocent parties from fraudulent/negligent parties and are referred to less than 1% of 1% of the time, right??

Keep well,
Mike
 
I work with them and have never been tendered the contract that I can remember. What good is the contract anyway if they send you an unsigned one? In order for a contract to be valid do both parties not need to have a signed copy?
 
MikeJr ... that contract does look quite familiar for some reason. It's a lot less doom & gloom, and at a quick glance does seem to be quite fair.
Rob ... you are 110% correct. If the person issuing you the contract has not signed it and returned it to you, it is as good as null and void.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Xplcorp
yeah this contract seems like BS if they don't have an MC but are referring to american law...

@Rob yes both need to be signed but it's a very good business practice to never send a pre-signed document. this way it can't be tampered with later on. only gets signed & co-signed as it is happening. most people do it this way.
 
Funny thing about contracts......their value and enforce-ability is usually only determined once they get dragged before the courts. We use the NTBA broker/carrier contract and to date, have never had a need to enforce it. I know that we would all prefer to operate on the old fashioned "handshake" and mutual fair treatment understanding, but the moment the s**t hits the fan, your lawyer will ask, "did you have a contract with the other party"? From a carrier's perspective, the answer is yes, the Bill of Lading (Contract of Carriage). A broker is better served having something that spells out each party's responsibilities in the event he or his lawyer has to explain how transportation works to a judge with very limited knowledge of the subject.
 
I just love the part in the Service Freight contract that says they can come look at any of my books as far back as 7 years.
 
Finally got my very own copy of their contract ... LOL
So, I read it, re-read it, really re-read it ... then bounced my head off my desk. I've always found SFS to be pretty good to deal with when we have matched up on things, so I'm not sure what to make of this ... it's the oddest contract I have ever come across.
In a nutshell they go to great lengths to try and specify every detail of the relationship, even going so far as to try and contract outside the law (which you can't do) in many places, and then they nullify almost the entire agreement in item 19 by saying that governing law shall be that of the Province of Ontario to the exclusion of all other laws, rules, and regulations.
The return copy I sent them had about 2/3 of it crossed out, and was left unsigned. I'm thinking if they had a lawyer draw that up for them, they should ask for their money back ... LOL
 
bubba-one said:
I just love the part in the Service Freight contract that says they can come look at any of my books as far back as 7 years.
Click to expand...
I had had customers ask for that, I told them sure, as long as I can look at yours, seeing as though you are the one that is being extended credit. The relationship ended there.
 
Most contracts can be summarized as follows: "We're not liable for anything, you are liable for everything, and if anything at all goes wrong pay up or get sued". If you can turn that into a 30 page contract you're lawyer material.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Igor Galanter, hauling_ass and Shakey
My favorite part of the whole deal is the fact that they pay after 45 days. But if there is a claim, they want their money in 30 days. Yeah okay...
 
Has anyone seen the new contract from GMR Transportation Broker, from Quebec. Always thought these guys were ok, the contract makes me think differently. I will not sign a contract, just makes good fire starter, ( whoops we have fire ban here)
 
A contract should merely be a mutually agreed upon document that spells out the service requested, the amount of payment agreed to and THE LENGHT OF TERM OF THE AGREEMENT. Most documents that call themselves contracts now say nothing about the length of term. They allow the shipper/3PL to terminate at any time they find a better rate with no penalty. The carrier can also simply stop picking up with no penalty. These are not contracts, but are Customer Demand letters and should be treated as such. If it was a contract it would clearly spell out the service levels expected and the shippers right to cancel if service levels fall below a pre agreed level. Both parties would be committed for a specific period of time as long as the carrier was doing an acceptable job. Price would not be a factor until it came up for renewal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom