Lawyer to represent trucking company against shipper

[Jim L]

Can anyone recommend a good lawyer or a person who can represent a trucking company with a suit against a shipper?

We may have a shipper who paid their broker but the broker is AWOL. We are not getting paid and I would like some recommendations about the BOL Act in Ontario.

I think this person would be in high demand right about now.


Thanks,

 

[jonny-chicken]

JimL,

You may not need a lawyer for this problem. Especially if the shipper is a large corporation.

You should send a formal letter by courier or even by fax to the shipper explaining in great detail everything about the load and about your collection attempts. Direct the letter to the president of the company. Tell them you intend to sue all parties involved in your own jurisdiction and that they will have to defend themselves in your local courthouse. Don't forget to tell them that a judgement will be entered against them if they fail to register a defence, and they will be responsible for your court costs.

I have done this many times over the years when brokers don't pay, and each time I have been paid promptly after sending the letter. If this doesn't work, THEN call a lawyer. But you may not need to spend your money on that.

Good Luck.

 

[thefriendlybroker]

Jonny chicken !...

Maybe you could help me out !... I have a carrier that delivered two skids short ( 108 cases less than they picked up) They are saying its not their fault and that they didn't touch anything. The b.o.l only states the cases on order and picked up and then a stamp on received showing a lower amount.
I've already paid the carrier for the transport, but do not know how to collect from him on the missing product without going to court.

My client has already deducted the amount of almost $ 2000 from me because of this.

Any suggestions ?

 

[lowmiler88]

Put a claim into their insurance broker and if they won't listen get your insurance broker involved.

 

[Jim L]

Jonny,

Thanks for the advise, I have tried that on other occasions and it has worked successfully but I am almost to the point that I have to call their bluff and if I had the name of someone who would be able to spell out the BOL act definitively then they may be a little more responsive.

They are very upset with their inhouse carrier gone broker and then gone broke and even more upset they they have to pay twice. I don't even blame them for being upset but we have the BOL act and the shipper knew it was being brokered out because they printed our carrier name on their own BOL.

At this point in time, I think they want to hear from my lawyer but now I need a competant one that is verse with the BOL act.

Jim

 

[jonny-chicken]

Hey Friendly Broker,

I've dealt with a very similar situation to that as well. Here's what happened in my case.

I sent a carrier in to do a load for my customer. They picked up and delivered, but the amount of product the driver signed for at the shipper did not show up at the receiver. When the load arrived at the receiver, they said Hey, this load is less than what it says on the paperwork. The carrier refused to do anything about this, saying they did not touch the load and the delivered exactly what they picked up and said the paperwork at the shipper must've been wrong.

My customer short-paid me stating that they were taking out the portion of pay they lost due to the short shipment. I really don't know what happened, I don't actually think the driver stole anything, but at the same time, the driver signed for a specific amount of freight and probably just didn't look at the load to confirm it.

Anyway, the carrier was adamant, no way were they going to pay for the missing freight. I wasn't about to pay for it myself, but my customer short-paid me and I have to say, the paperwork says it all. Anyway, after speaking to my insurance broker and getting a little advice, I called the carrier's insurance company, not the broker but the actual insurance company, I think it was Kingsway. I told them I wanted to initiate a claim on the carrier's behalf as they had chosen not to. I dealt with a lot of bullshit and calls back and forth, but I ended up on the phone with a manager at the claims department for the carrier's insurer, and I told them outright, "You will all be sued unless you want to resolve this right now". I quickly got a letter from them stating they do not admit fault but will be paying out the claim as they do not wish to take this to court. I received a chq within days. And if you can believe this, the amount of the claim was a measly $1000 USD, probably far under the carrier's deductible, but they paid out it anyway.

SOrry for the long story, but I'm a details kind of guy. If you want some more specific help with this one, feel free to Private Message me and we can go from there.

 

[jonny-chicken]

Approximately how much money are we talking about here JimL?

Is the amount over or under $10,000.00 ?

If under, don't waste time and money on a lawyer, you can do it all yourself. And don't worry about explaining the law to these jackasses, you are not required to educate them. If it is under 10K just sue them in small claims court and be done with it, they will most likely settle especially if they are far away from your court jurisdiction. This will cost you just $75 to get started and depending on how you go, it may not cost much more.

If it is over 10K, then yes, you may want to call in a lawyer. I don't know much about them because I have never used one for such a purpose. If you do have to go this route I would start with the Lawyer Referal Service. This is a service you can use to speak briefly to a lawyer about your problem and they can tell you if they can help. It's a cheap way to get started. Here is some info on the Ontario version of this service, but I'm sure it is available in all provinces.

The Lawyer Referral Service is designed to provide callers with up to 30 minutes of free legal consultation either by phone or in person. The service is not designed to provide legal advice or second opinions. Fees should be discussed with the lawyer prior to any work being done. This is a pay per use service and a $6 flat fee will automatically be added to your phone bill.

Here is their phone number, again, you will be charged $6 on your phone for calling this number, but I think it's $6 well spent.

1-900-565-4577

Good luck, and if you are going the small claims route, keep me posted and I will gladly assist as you go along.

 

[faey06]

Hi Jim.. I have a power-point presentation on the BOL act if you want it

 

[Jim L]

I have tried the Small claims court venue and I got a judgement but found that I couldn't collect because the guy was an incorporation that had nothing. I couldn't even go after him personally. It was very frustrating and very time consuming.

It is under $10000 but the aggrevation for me is the point here.

I just would like to drop it on a desk of someone to collect or at least rattle the chains. I thought that somewhere out there there would be someone like you Jonny that would setup a service like this and make $$ of the volume.

Collection agencies are a joke because they don't know the BOL act and will not call the shipper.

 

[micmac]

JimL - Give Gord Meakings a call at Armstrong Meakings in Barrie - Gord's a good lawyer with a lot of experience with transportation issues ie insurance, litigation etc - obtained my authorities through him and I know he has several fairly large clients that are trucking companies - His number is 705-739-9111 - I'm sure he will give you an honest assessment of your situation and be able to recommend appropriate recourse.

 

[loaders]

JimL, you could try sending a private message to Scam Chaser. He is a very good paralegal with many years experience in transportation. Sometimes a paralegal can obtain the same results without the extra expense of a lawyer.

 

[Activet]

Mercantile Law Amendment Act

Can anyone recommend a good lawyer or a person who can represent a trucking company with a suit against a shipper?

We may have a shipper who paid their broker but the broker is AWOL. We are not getting paid and I would like some recommendations about the BOL Act in Ontario.

I think this person would be in high demand right about now.


Thanks,

Hi Jim.

The act you refer to is, I believe, the Mercantile Law Amendment Act.

The provisions therein allow a carrier to seek payment from a consignee. It does not address any rights you may have against a shipper.

If the consignee is located in Ontario, you have a very good chance of recovering your loss.

If not, then I would commence litigation in Small Claims Court against the Broker(business entity), as well as the directors personally, as the funds should have been held in a trust. There is now jurisprudence that indicates the willingness of the Ontario Court to pierce the corporate veil in enforcing the statutory trust provisions.

Good Luck with this!

 

[Jim L]

The act you refer to is, I believe, the Mercantile Law Amendment Act.

The provisions therein allow a carrier to seek payment from a consignee. It does not address any rights you may have against a shipper.

If the consignee is located in Ontario, you have a very good chance of recovering your loss.

If not, then I would commence litigation in Small Claims Court against the Broker(business entity), as well as the directors personally, as the funds should have been held in a trust. There is now jurisprudence that indicates the willingness of the Ontario Court to pierce the corporate veil in enforcing the statutory trust provisions.

Good Luck with this!

Thanks for the information. This is the kind of stuff that a lawyer would easily be able to decipher rather than me.

I was under the impression that if the freight is shown as Prepaid on the BOL than the shipper was responsible. If the freight was marked Collect then the consignee is responsible.

I always find that by the time you name the directors personally they happen to be not the director at the time. You really need a lawyer to do the research properly.

 

[Activet]

"pre-paid" on the bill of lading"

Thanks for the information. This is the kind of stuff that a lawyer would easily be able to decipher rather than me.

I was under the impression that if the freight is shown as Prepaid on the BOL than the shipper was responsible. If the freight was marked Collect then the consignee is responsible.

Hey Jim,


To clear up any confusion regarding "pre-paid" marked on the Bill of Lading, here is an excerpt from the Dec. 2007 newsletters section on the website of Fernandes Hearn LLP. Fernandes Hearn LLP - Maritime, Insurance and Transportation Law Firm Canada


Section 2: S.G.T. 2000 Inc. v. Molson Breweries of Canada Ltd. 2007


This required Molson to show that there was something both intentional and binding with the reference to "pre-paid" on the bill of lading (Note: such a reference on a bill of lading is usually intended only to ease billing logistics between the shipper and the carrier - the carrier being directed to forward invoicing to the shipper as opposed to a third party or the consignee paying on 'collect' terms). The Court of Appeal ruled that the 'prepaid' reference was accordingly not enough by itself to deprive the carriers of the protection of the statute. This manifestation of the standard intent of initially looking to the shipper for freight charges does not by itself equate to a carrier choosing not to avail itself of this statutory 'fall back' position of looking to the consignee for payment if necessary. This however does not mean that in a certain fact situation that a carrier might represent to a shipper or consignee that it will not exercise its right to look to the consignee for payment having the effect of the loss of this protection. Something more is however is needed in this regard than a mere 'prepaid' reference on the bill of lading. Absent specific arrangements whereby the carriers were not to take the benefit of the legislation that this provision should govern, the Court ruled that parties cannot be presumed to have relinquished or waived rights by mere silence.

In conclusion, the notion or concept of "pre-paid" services does not by itself constitute a relinquishment by the carrier of the rights afforded to it under the legislation.
END.



So..... there you have it. From reading the above reasons, seeking payment from the consignee is really a "fall back position", so pursuing the shipper would seem the likely place to start. A lawyer's letter to them would probably be all it takes to get a favorable outcome.

Again, Good Luck!

 

[Wiley One]

short shipment

That's my I tell our drivers over and over and over COUNT! If you can't count it don't sign it. Don't sign for 2500 pcs if your not going to count to 2500. Sign for the # of bundles,skids etc.

 

[Jim L]

So..... there you have it. From reading the above reasons, seeking payment from the consignee is really a "fall back position", so pursuing the shipper would seem the likely place to start. A lawyer's letter to them would probably be all it takes to get a favorable outcome.

Again, Good Luck!

Thanks for the light reading material and this is good news for some but we have a freight broker in the middle. It is not exactly the same particulars as the case above so I don't know if it would be the same.

I always tell the shippers that their "agent" by the name of <Loadbroker> is failing to pay us and therefore the onus is on the shipper to ensure we are paid. Most of the time this action gets the shipper to at least call the broker and get an update. The loadbroker always answers the phone for them because they are expecting another load or a payment so this works well. I then get a phone call from the broker - step 1 completed, a dialogue with the guy who has been avoiding me. Usually it turns into a " <Expletitive blah blah blah> You called my customer so I am not paying you for sure" and I calmly reply "Thanks, I've recorded this so when I meet with the shipper he can hear it himself and I can pick up the cheque from the shipper" This turns the conversation right around and were back to step 1 again - dialogue that is a little more like a conversation. We can then chat about a plan of action to getting paid.

The other option is to put them on conference call and let them scream at each other and call each other names and in the end ask them where can I pick up the cheque.

It has worked for me on numerous occasions and on a couple occasions I have obtained a real good customer out of the deal.

Thanks again.

 

[PackRat]

Bill Of Lading

I believe that all parties listed on the Bill of Lading can be held liable for the shipping costs. basically what it comes down to is who is still in business that is listed on the BOL. there are several precedents that have already been set and that is what the courts decide if it gets that far. From the carrier's perspective keep going down the list of all parties listed on the BOL until someone pays. if that doesn't work you name them all in court and let the judge decide. The last situation that I had like this, I sent a letter to the consignee ( which was strictly a 3rd party warehouse) and told them that they were listed on the BOL as the consignee and were liable since the shipper (the warehouse's customer) wasn't paying the freight charges. They forced the shipper (their customer) to pay the freight invoice BEFORE they would release any of the product. Took some time a 1 letter but we received our money.

 

[faey06]

I was successful in 2 instances. 1 where the shipper paid because the "broker" had declared bankruptcy and the second 1 where the shipper made the "broker" pay us before they would release funds to him. sweet

 

[stressbeater]

Try Bill at TCRC legal - he knows the industry and has a proven track record in securing payment relative to BOL/Merchantile et al.
TCRC can be reached at 416-556-0297