New brokerages - MC# starting with 14 / 15

frtbrkr said:
Mortgage Brokers, Stock Brokers, Insurance Brokers, Customs Brokers and every other type of Broker is highly regulated on a provincial level and maybe even on a Federal level.

Freight brokerage isn't, there is no reason for it, except for the fact the large players in the Canadian Transport industry have yet to apply the right political pressure in Ottawa to bring this into order.

Brokers should be regulated and LL should be responsible to enforce it as the only Load matching in the country.
Click to expand...
There already is a level of Provincial regulation in place. Freight brokers are required, under the Ontario Highway Traffic Act, to hold any monies received from a shipper, that is payable to a carrier, in a Trust Fund. In addition, any freight broker or carrier that engages in brokering cross border (US/Canadian) freight must be registered with the US FMCSA, which includes obtaining a 75K surety bond. Regulation and licensing are all good steps and can be worthwhile but nothing, and I mean nothing, will ever replace good old fashioned, stringent due diligence to ensure that your customers are able to pay on time and your suppliers can perform as promised. The Federal government wants no part of what is primarily a Provincial matter, and the current Ontario Provincial government always favours de-regulation versus more red tape and bureaucracy
 
  • Like
Reactions: MLCAR and tasuinam
MikeJr said:
Well said Loaders, I do think that what frtbrkr is saying is that despite there being these regulations, there is literally zero enforcement. If no one is checking, why play be the rules?

Keep well,
Mike
Click to expand...
Agreed. However, I guess the point I am trying to make is, regardless of what business you might be in, it is a dangerous mistake to replace or reduce your own due diligence and vetting of both suppliers and customers, and leave that critical function in the hands of some government agency. In the case of the existing, albeit somewhat weak regulations, the onus should be on a carrier to check and ensure that the broker he/she is contemplating dealing with is complaint. I agree, the current regs are not strong enough, however, they are marginally better than nothing.
 
1000 percent yes!! If you are a carrier who is considering adding a broker to your customer list, check that they have a valid MC, $75k bond, and if possible, verify they are using the proper trust account to hold their funds separate from their operating account.

Yes, Rob and others will correctly state that the $75k is a drop in the bucket of the businesses that go under who usually owe in the millions, but if an organization is going through all the proper checks and balances and is properly registered, insured, bonded etc., chances are they aren't intentionally going to screw everyone over. Shhhhhhhh - don't tell the fraudsters this secret.

Keep well,
Mike
 
  • Like
Reactions: Igor Galanter and loaders
MikeJr said:
1000 percent yes!! If you are a carrier who is considering adding a broker to your customer list, check that they have a valid MC, $75k bond, and if possible, verify they are using the proper trust account to hold their funds separate from their operating account.

Yes, Rob and others will correctly state that the $75k is a drop in the bucket of the businesses that go under who usually owe in the millions, but if an organization is going through all the proper checks and balances and is properly registered, insured, bonded etc., chances are they aren't intentionally going to screw everyone over. Shhhhhhhh - don't tell the fraudsters this secret.

Keep well,
Mike
Click to expand...
Correct! A fraudster, or a potential fraudster isn’t going to the trouble of registering their business with the FMCSA, trying to qualify for a 75k surety bond, or even opening a trust account. Why should they? As pointed out, enforcement is virtually non existent and there are more than enough carriers out there who get themselves into desperate situations where a “sketchy” broker’s load is all they can find. The presence or absence of regulation never takes the place of partnering with ethical, well vetted companies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MikeJr, MLCAR and tasuinam
You cant be serious my friends.

we have been in business for over 25 years.

I have yet to had a Canadian Carrier asking us for our QC Brokerage license (which is meaningless document in it on it self) or for our US MC#.
Not even once was it asked, I'm not kidding

USA carrier will ALWAYS ask for the MC#, Canadian carrier never.

It basically means, that any broker can post on the LL and have access to carriers in a moments notice with 0 registration and/or accountability.

There is 0 enforcement in Canada, 0.

The same logic that applies to regulate other brokerages in the industries I've listed above, applies in Transport as well.
 
Last edited:
frtbrkr said:
You cant be serious my friends.

we have been in business for over 25 years.

I have yet to had a Canadian Carrier asking us for our QC Brokerage license (which is meaningless document in it on it self) or for our US MC#.
Not even once was it asked, I'm not kidding

USA carrier will ALWAYS ask for the MC#, Canadian carrier never.

It basically means, that any broker can post on the LL and have access to carriers in moments notice with 0 registration and/or accountability.

There is 0 enforcement in Canada, 0.

The same logic that applies to reregulate other brokerages in the industries I've listed above, applies in Transport as well.
Click to expand...
as part of ur vetting process we always check FMCSA / google the broker / usually the MC# is posted on LL / DAT details ...
 
tasuinam said:
as part of ur vetting process we always check FMCSA / google the broker / usually the MC# is posted on LL / DAT details ...
Click to expand...
Good for you.

Our MC# is not on our loadlink profile, because i wanted to check what will happen.

No one asking for it.

But even if it was there, how do we regulate intra-Canada shipments?
 
Wishing for some sort of iron fisted, all encompassing, government imposed regulation that will eliminate double brokering, or late/non payment, or any other type of unethical behaviour that takes place in our industry is a waste of time. Regardless of how nice and certainly convenient it would be for someone else (the government) to guarantee and back stop a positive outcome for every decision we make, the onus will always remain, as it should, with the business operator to ensure that the parties he/she chooses to deal with are in fact, worth working with. In spite of all the various industry regulations, some lawyers still commit fraud, a few mortgage brokers continue to misuse clients funds, and occasionally stock brokers embezzle pensions funds for their own benefit. Regulations should never take the place of a serious and comprehensive vetting process of both your customers and suppliers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chica123
JACKBURTON said:
Whoa that's a pretty radical business concept.
Click to expand...
ha ha ha ha ha .... during the 'fat years' we picked a load from candid haulers on reference from a broker we work with - his load need to be rescued ... we amazingly got paid - but thankfully never worked with Candid again ... so the reference was for the one time only and that saved us I guess - the approach works
 
  • Like
Reactions: MLCAR and Igor Galanter
loaders said:
Agreed. However, I guess the point I am trying to make is, regardless of what business you might be in, it is a dangerous mistake to replace or reduce your own due diligence and vetting of both suppliers and customers, and leave that critical function in the hands of some government agency. In the case of the existing, albeit somewhat weak regulations, the onus should be on a carrier to check and ensure that the broker he/she is contemplating dealing with is complaint. I agree, the current regs are not strong enough, however, they are marginally better than nothing.
Click to expand...
Kinda like this fella loaders?

 
  • Like
Reactions: MLCAR and frtbrkr
  • Like
Reactions: MLCAR
frtbrkr said:
Mortgage Brokers, Stock Brokers, Insurance Brokers, Customs Brokers and every other type of Broker is highly regulated on a provincial level and maybe even on a Federal level.
Click to expand...
Each one of these brokers have the same issues that plague the trucking industry. Ask your insurance broker - he will tell you a dozen or more insurance brokers who do not play by the 'rules'. Customs brokers are the same, some brokers will take an invoice hand written on a paper, others will not.

Our industry needs to make the freight brokers accountable by not using those who do not have all their documents or ducks in a row. If you think they're not worth it then don't take a chance with them. LL will not do that for you except for maybe ensuring that they are a business entity are able to pay LL for their services up front. The large players in the industry use brokers very infrequently and when they do they are setup with the big boys like CH Robinson and TQL and just bite the bullet on low rates. They absolutely enjoy us little guys fighting for the last penny racing to the bottom. The faster the better they say.
 
Jim L said:
Each one of these brokers have the same issues that plague the trucking industry. Ask your insurance broker - he will tell you a dozen or more insurance brokers who do not play by the 'rules'. Customs brokers are the same, some brokers will take an invoice hand written on a paper, others will not.

Our industry needs to make the freight brokers accountable by not using those who do not have all their documents or ducks in a row. If you think they're not worth it then don't take a chance with them. LL will not do that for you except for maybe ensuring that they are a business entity are able to pay LL for their services up front. The large players in the industry use brokers very infrequently and when they do they are setup with the big boys like CH Robinson and TQL and just bite the bullet on low rates. They absolutely enjoy us little guys fighting for the last penny racing to the bottom. The faster the better they say.
Click to expand...
i respectfully disagree
 
I agree that the larger players largely only play with the larger brokers. When everyone is operating on rolling lines of credit, the creditors have to be reportable from time to time - some players would be considered insurable and some not, which could affect their credit. It's not just freight brokers but customers too, though larger carriers typically will go after bigger fish.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom