Question about double brokering

[thebluffs1]

As far as we go, we accept the dispatch service but each of the carrier using the dispatch service wll have to register seprately with their own authorities and insurance for us to accept dealing with such a service. As said, the deal, comissission, bonus, wage, between them stays between them and one should pay the other for the dispatch service they buy. Not us, and certainly not be blinded by this type of operation. I add that once we explain, mst legit dispatch service do accept that we pay their "broker" So we are in line with your actions as well.

For US domestic freight - no dispatch services- but are they ever insistent on postings!
In Ontario - we work with two only, both of which we've known for decades - RVI (Reciprical Ventures) from Wallenstein, and TDS from Sunderland. Both of them have an extremely stable base of carriers and are always extremely clear about which carriers are performing the actual services.

 

[Fr8Guru]

70% of my assets are customer-routed; furthermore, I think going customer-direct is the best thing possible for a carrier - I'm just tired (from a carrier side) of getting requests for quotes from brokers without FMCSA authority. I have people telling me they are a Canadian non-asset broker and they don't need an MC to broker cross-border freight. Sometimes I get calls from trucking companies looking to cover FTL/LTL, and I wonder how they land a Fortune 500 company from Ahmedabad.

You'd be surprised how far a real good sales guy can get you.

Smooth talker, wine and dine type person can open a lot of doors still. Especially one who has been in the business for 10-15 years and has legit contacts.

Open is the key word there, they shut real fast now with the big boys.

 

[artmax]

You'd be surprised how far a real good sales guy can get you.

Smooth talker, wine and dine type person can open a lot of doors still. Especially one who has been in the business for 10-15 years and has legit contacts.

Open is the key word there, they shut real fast now with the big boys.

I hire these guys instantly & give 70% of the net! If you're not making 70% - just know you could be!

 

[Freight Broker]

Tell your shipper the name of the carrier you’re sending in, and if they load someone else then it’s not your problem. I recently had a shipper load a double brokered truck, and there was a rust claim on the load. I told the shipper politely that they needed to contact the person they hired to haul the load, and that I had nothing to do with it, nor would I expect payment for moving it.

 

[loaders]

Tell your shipper the name of the carrier you’re sending in, and if they load someone else then it’s not your problem. I recently had a shipper load a double brokered truck, and there was a rust claim on the load. I told the shipper politely that they needed to contact the person they hired to haul the load, and that I had nothing to do with it, nor would I expect payment for moving it.

That sounds great and I am sure in most cases it works smoothly. However in many situations, the poor sot driving the forklift can be easily convinced, confused or persuaded into loading a double brokered truck by a persistent, demanding driver. Imagine, the other trucks are lining up in the parking lot, management has everyone operating at double time speed to keep up with production and now a truck is asking for a legitimate order that is currently taking up precious dock space. In a perfect world, yes, the shipper gets off his forklift, goes back to the office and tries to reach someone in the traffic department for authorization to load a truck with a different name. Should they?…of course…..do they?…..not always.

 

[Freight Broker]

All true, but if something happens it’s not my problem. I.e. If I hire carrier ABC who double brokers the load to carrier DEF and DEF T bones a school bus then (beyond the cliche thoughts and prayers) it’s not my problem. My customer loaded another vendor for the load. My contract with my customers states that explicitly and indemnifies me in the event that they load someone else i.e.I tell them exactly who I’m sending in, and if they load someone else either by accident or by design then for all intents and purposes they chose another vendor.

 

[loaders]

In effect, we are all saying the same thing, repeatedly…due diligence, due diligence, due diligence. Whether it is a written in-house procedure, a signed contract or some other verifiable process of vetting suppliers, freight brokers in today’s litigious environment must do everything in their power to protect themselves and their customers. Unfortunately, and I am afraid this is something we can all agree on, that in spite of our best efforts, the criminal element in our industry has a tendency to always be one step ahead or us, possessing one devious angle that can circumvent even our best defences. Maintaining and restricting business relationships only with proven, reputable suppliers is still, in my opinion, the “gold standard” for preventing double brokering and many of the other dangers and pitfalls that remain a constant in our industry.

 

[Jim L]

Tell your shipper the name of the carrier you’re sending in, and if they load someone else then it’s not your problem. I recently had a shipper load a double brokered truck, and there was a rust claim on the load. I told the shipper politely that they needed to contact the person they hired to haul the load, and that I had nothing to do with it, nor would I expect payment for moving it.

That is an excellent position to take. Too many times, the guy with the money and the work (usually the shipper) gets off scot-free for any of the issues that their shipment causes. I cannot count the number of times that accessorial fees are never communicated to the payor via the broker. Either the broker says it isn't approved (likely never asked), or they take it out of their end. If brokers pushed all issues down to the payor the problematic issues would get fixed. If freight payors don't know they can't fix it. If shippers cannot communicate down to their employees to check the DOT/CVOR number on the truck, then that will be an issue they have to deal with when it goes sideways.

 

[Aeriga]

Does anyone want to share their vetting process or where they check?

Want to make sure all my bases are covered but I'm sure there are others who may not know how to go about it and if there are any new places that should be checked for info.

 

[Shakey]

Can't tell the scammers, they watch, everything we do;-0

 

[Fr8Guru]

Does anyone want to share their vetting process or where they check?

Want to make sure all my bases are covered but I'm sure there are others who may not know how to go about it and if there are any new places that should be checked for info.

Highway
411
Genlogs

Insurance must come from the broker/agent directly. No forwards or anything allowed
We must be listed on COI, no generic copies

Contract is sent only to verified email in highway/FMSCA
Must be signed via our portal

 

[Freight Broker]

Don’t just ask for the COI..ask for a copy of the agreement too. Review the exclusions carefully... some will state that they cover absolutely nothing.

 

[Aeriga]

Highway
411
Genlogs

Insurance must come from the broker/agent directly. No forwards or anything allowed
We must be listed on COI, no generic copies

Contract is sent only to verified email in highway/FMSCA
Must be signed via our portal

Thank you, just making sure we aren't missing anything or any other databases we aren't aware of.

 

[thebluffs1]

Thank you, just making sure we aren't missing anything or any other databases we aren't aware of.

Whats worked for us:

avoid anyone insured with a Nordic policy - they are the fronting company for the government mandated facility program - for the trucking companies who think that facility insurance is a legitimate business model. Eliminating any carriers with Nordic insurance or who have "Mango" as a broker has eliminated a lot of headaches for our logistics team. If they take short cuts with insurance, they'll take short cuts with operations, with compliance and with everything else.

 

[Fr8Guru]

Whats worked for us:

avoid anyone insured with a Nordic policy - they are the fronting company for the government mandated facility program - for the trucking companies who think that facility insurance is a legitimate business model. Eliminating any carriers with Nordic insurance or who have "Mango" as a broker has eliminated a lot of headaches for our logistics team. If they take short cuts with insurance, they'll take short cuts with operations, with compliance and with everything else.

Southlake and Star are both good companies to avoid as well, both operate only in the US I believe.

Both have a crazy list of exclusions, not worth the headache

 

[loaders]

One more vetting procedure to remember is….what does your gut say? For newer employees with only a few years of experience, that may not be applicable. However the old saying “if it sounds too good to be true” should always be considered. . The unknown carrier who suddenly appears with the right truck exactly where you need it at a really reasonable rate, especially after you’ve been actively searching for hours. In today’s environment, if the slightest little thing doesn’t seem right, you’re better off to pass.

 

[Nawk]

Can't tell the scammers, they watch, everything we do;-0

He's right... they do.

and if you ever refuse a carrier to onboard with you... DO NOT tell them the reason(s) why.
if you tell them why you don't want to work with them, they'll change that... you're essentially helping them to become a better crook.

 

[Igor Galanter]

He's right... they do.

and if you ever refuse a carrier to onboard with you... DO NOT tell them the reason(s) why.
if you tell them why you don't want to work with them, they'll change that... you're essentially helping them to become a better crook.

Exactly.. I usually was turning away with the - " I have a bad reviews about your business from my sources, eh".. Let them search if they want to..

 

[thebluffs1]

He's right... they do.

and if you ever refuse a carrier to onboard with you... DO NOT tell them the reason(s) why.
if you tell them why you don't want to work with them, they'll change that... you're essentially helping them to become a better croo

Well, I sometimes don't. Unless I have proof that they use the driver inc model, or use facility insurance or misrepresent their home jurisdiction - ie AB/NB/NS office address with actual operations in Ontario - then I just tell them straight up what the issue is.

 

[Brenda]

I wee bit off topic, but how do the rest of my brokerage colleagues deal with “dispatch services”.? It is my belief that as long as you are paying the actual carrier who performed the work, it is a legitimate transaction . If that carrier wants to pay a finders fee, or a service commission, that’s between them. If you are paying the “dispatch service” directly however, it would be, or should be, considered double brokering.

We don't work with them. I feel like there are too many layers and the rate to the carrier is getting diluted. At the end of the day, we consider it double brokering.