The $24,000 Lesson: When "Easy Loads" Become Expensive

[TaskSwap]

Running a trucking company is a lot like starring in a sitcom.
Every episode starts with optimism.
One of my new dispatchers walks into the office with a huge smile.

"I found a broker that's amazing! Loads are easy to book!"

Cue the cheerful theme music.
The trucks are rolling. Drivers are happy. Dispatch is smiling. Everyone is acting like we've finally unlocked trucking on "easy mode."
Then... I make the mistake of opening the aging report.

Record scratch.
One invoice.
Thirty days.

Another invoice.
Sixty days.

Then I spot one that's over 70 days old.
Suddenly the background laughter disappears.
Apparently, the only thing moving slower than those invoices was the payment.
By this point, we're owed about $24,000.
So I decide the next episode needs a different ending.
I accept one more load, but with one tiny condition:
"Let's clear up the outstanding invoices first."

Silence.
Not the good kind.
The awkward kind.
That's when I start making phone calls and eventually reach the customer directly. Based on what I was told, it appeared the load had been double brokered. The original broker was willing to pay for the current load if it was delivered.

Great.
That solves... exactly one load.
The other unpaid invoices are still sitting there like leftovers nobody wants to claim.

If trucking has taught me anything, it's this:

• Easy loads don't always mean easy money.
• Trust is good; verification is better.
• Your aging report deserves more attention than your social media feed.
• And whenever everything seems a little too smooth, that's usually the universe warming up for a plot twist.

We're now working through our options to recover the outstanding balance and learning from the experience.
I'm curious how other carriers have handled situations where they later discovered a load may have been double brokered. What worked? What didn't?
Because if this episode can save someone else from starring in the sequel, it'll have been worth sharing.


NOTE
The broker involved in this experience was 1001396248 Ontario Inc. dba NT Logistics, located at 400–2 County Court Blvd., Brampton, ON L6W 3W8. According to our records, our company had approximately $24,000 in unpaid invoices, with the oldest invoice more than 70 days overdue. When we contacted the customer directly regarding a subsequent load, we were informed that the shipment had been double brokered.

 

[loaders]

Sounds like a review of your credit authorization system is in order. I couldn’t find an NT Logistics on Safer, so I assume they are unlicensed and have no surety bond you could claim against. No one likes getting the run around from delinquent customers but the onus is on the provider of the credit to ensure that the recipient is worthy. Good luck recouping your overdue receivables.

 

[Igor Galanter]

M

Post in thread '1001396248 Ontario Inc dba NT Logistics'

Mar 27, 2026

This "carrier" is a double broker. Booked 2 loads with them. The first started very weird with communication, so we asked another carrier of ours to take a picture of the truck

NT Logistics in Brampton ON double brokered 2 loads without our authorization or knowledge.

1st load was double brokered to Kartz Transport (somehow also related to SKB Transport & WestX Logistics) - NT Logistics originally picked up on March 12th. After being ghosted and lied to for 5 days we were able to confirm the load was being hauled by Kartz Transport. We reached out to them directly. Throughout...

• Meelo

 

[Michael Ludwig]

Years ago (I'm old and I remember shit), shortly after LoadLink had come into its own, the industry went through a bit of the same thing. Any load broker with a phone number that started with 514, 450, or 819, or was otherwise exposed to be located in Quebec, was automatically put on the DNU list, and generally excluded from viewing carrier equipment posts on LL by most carriers until the brokers in question proved themselves not to be the nefarious creatures we were all trying to avoid. Back then our list was whittled down to only 3 load brokers in the entire province of Quebec that we would work with.
Eventually that premise extended to load brokers located in Nevada, NYC, and Illinois.
It's sounding like most carriers are going to have to start doing the same thing again with brokers located in Brampton.

 

[loaders]

Just as there are bad carriers, bad shoe makers and bad candle stick makers, there are bad freight brokers. The onus has always been and will continue to always be, on the part of the customer to ensure that the supplier they are dealing with is legitimate. We have had countless discussions on this site about the proper way to vet new suppliers and how to perform ones due diligence. Criminals, regardless of what their pseudo profession may be, are like rats. They will always find a way to get past your defences, to scurry into cracks in your firewalls.

 

[Michael Ludwig]

I'm going to assume by the term "customer" you are referring the original payer of the freight bill, correct?
That being said, there is generally no legal deterrent, or consequence, in place to prevent the payer of the freight bill from hiring anyone, anyone at all, to move their freight. Generally speaking it is literally no sweat off their ass at all if the load broker, regardless of pedigree, does not pay the carrier. Until the original payer of the freight bill has some skin in the game, this situation is never going to improve.