what do I do??

Agreed

Freight Broker said:
In other words you pay the carrier even when the shipper does not pay you. congrats..that's the way i operate as well. Thus we do take responsibility although that responsibility is often not imposed upon us by law.

We need carriers...they need us...hence we all continue to exist...
Click to expand...

I have paid carriers when 2 customers went bankrupt - about 3 years apart. Even though it seems inequitable at times, like you Freight Broker, I don't need laws to imposed on me to do the right thing. I just wish that everybody in this business were of the same mindset.
 
Activet said:
I have paid carriers when 2 customers went bankrupt - about 3 years apart. Even though it seems inequitable at times, like you Freight Broker, I don't need laws to imposed on me to do the right thing. I just wish that everybody in this business were of the same mindset.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately not everyone has the same ethics or scruples.
 
Wow what a great thread...

My humble thoughts...

Regarding the analogies of tires - Shops have the Garage Keepers ACt to ensure they do get paid...

Regarding none payment by a broker - The shipper, consignee, or everyone named on the BOL is liable for payment if the broker doesn't pay the carrier.

Under the laws of agency:

In the court case Mediterranean Shipping Company S.A. v BPB Westroc Inc

The judge concludes:

[35] Under the general principles of agency and by operation of law, non-payment by an agent is deemed non-payment by the principal. Westroc must be taken to have assumed the risk of paying twice if the party it relied upon to perform an essential function of its export program abused its position of trust by converting freight monies received for a designated purpose for its own use. Westroc ought to have been aware, or should have informed itself, whether the freight forwarder was an established, reputable freight forwarder with substantial assets, or simply a one-person operation with potential liquidity problems. Westroc was clearly in the best position to protect itself against an absconding forwarder.

Brokers are agents for either the shipper or consignee so therefore, if they didn't do their due deligence in hiring a reputable agent, they are definately liable.

Or, again, I may be wrong... lol
 
So the shipper is resonsible for the broker he hires but the carrier shouldn't be? Doesn't strike me as fair.
 
Last edited:
Freight Broker said:
So the shipper is resonsible for the broker he hires but the carrier shouldn't be? Doesn't strike me as fair.
Click to expand...

I have to disagree with you Freight Broker. The manufacturer is the entity that initiates all actions. If they make a poor choice in service provider, it is their mistake and they need to fix it. Whether it be by paying twice or getting a nasty message from their customer, it is their lack of due diligence that caused the problem. Once they have made amends, they are free to pursue those that perpetuated the problem with other legal avenues afforded them. They could have difficulty with a carrier, not just a broker. If the carrier doesn't deliver the product or damages everything, the manufacturer has to replace the damaged product to satisfy their customer and then deal with the claim against the carrier. This isn't just about brokers or carriers, it's about service providers and how well they perform.

If the manufacturer didn't make it and need it shipped, there wouldn't be any issues. Because the manufacturer makes a product, they assume responsibility to deliver it to their customer. That includes paying the carrier of record, regardless of the channels that determined that carrier.
 
Just another couple of point for the brokers (and keep in mind that we are carriers as well as brokers)...

If there is a damage claim, brokers, shippers, or consignees have absolutely no qualms about laying a damage claim on the carrier. In fact, it would probably be layed before the carrier has a chance to say "it was like that when they loaded it" lol...

Or if there are shortages, does the consignee call the broker and say, "you stole some of my stuff"? Chances are that the carrier will get crapped on big time.

We do see both sides of all these issues and are absolutely willing to work with all brokers and carriers. But at the end of the day, it has to be fair for all involved. A good deal is when both parties in the dispute lose (I think that's how it goes)...
 
so if the broker DOES pay the carrier..and the carrier does not pay its owner-operator for hauling the load..would the owner-operator then be able to go after the manufacturer too?
 
Manitoba Moose said:
Just another couple of point for the brokers (and keep in mind that we are carriers as well as brokers)...

If there is a damage claim, brokers, shippers, or consignees have absolutely no qualms about laying a damage claim on the carrier. In fact, it would probably be layed before the carrier has a chance to say "it was like that when they loaded it" lol...

Or if there are shortages, does the consignee call the broker and say, "you stole some of my stuff"? Chances are that the carrier will get crapped on big time.

We do see both sides of all these issues and are absolutely willing to work with all brokers and carriers. But at the end of the day, it has to be fair for all involved. A good deal is when both parties in the dispute lose (I think that's how it goes)...
Click to expand...

I just finished paying off a 30 thousand dollar claim on a damaged load... carriers don't always take the crap... this one disappeared on me and then went bust... When things go wrong most people are like rats on a ship...doesn't matter if if they're a broker..a carrier..a contractor..or a farmer...
 
2 more cents

Freight Broker said:
so if the broker DOES pay the carrier..and the carrier does not pay its owner-operator for hauling the load..would the owner-operator then be able to go after the manufacturer too?
Click to expand...

That depends on the wording of the contract between the carrier and the owner-operator.

I see your point Freight Broker but every business has risk. Companies that don't have their own transportation expose themselves to more risk than those that do. The more people involved, the more risk that something goes wrong.

If you as a broker don't get paid by your customer, where do you go to get the money owed to you so you can fulfill your commitment to the carrier? I assume because you are not the carrier of record you can't go after anyone other than your customer. Where does that leave you? I can tell you this, if a broker contacted me to tell me that their customer wasn't paying them and they asked me to go after the shipper or consignee I would consider it. It's when the broker doesn't tell me and then when I call 90 days later and I hear "my customer isn't paying me" that I get upset with the broker, not his customer! We all need to work together to make sure we ALL get paid for our work. This is a two way street, not two one-way streets.
 
As the onus is, by law, is on the shipper or consignee to ensure they hire good quality agents (read brokers), it is also on the brokers to ensure they are hiring good quality carriers as well as ensuring they have good quality clients. Only then can they be fully protected.

Freight broker, I don't disagree with you about it not being fair but like the Americans say regarding the right to bare arms "As long as the second ammendment stands, we will stand under its protection". The Mercantile Act, the BOL Act, and the laws of agency are in place and by god, we will stand under it's protection also.

I'm in total agreement with RK in MB...

Man, there's some smart people in Manitoba LMAO
 
As a broker I don't have the option..I HAVE to collect from my customer...either that or live with not getting paid. Going after anyone other than my customer is not an option...at least I'm not aware of any laws that allow me to collect from anyone other than my customer. So, I always go after them...and if they're late paying and it looks as if they may not pay at all then I come at the with both barrells...I have to as I don't have a choice. Last year I went after an account in Winnipeg... they stated they couldn't pay me but somehow could pay others such as their website provider. I flew out there and...well..let me tell you that I can be very persuasive in person. The person I needed to contact avoided me right to the end...but in the end I got what I wanted and an all expenses paid trip to Winnipeg to boot.
 
Whom to collect from?

I'm with you Freight Broker, that as a broker only, if my customer doesn't pay us, it threatens our existence. One thing I am not good at is being reasonable when owed money. If they don't pay me, not only will their customers know about it, their bank will as well. The there's possibly a call to the CRA. Funny how I can always talk to someone in accounts payable when I initially, (and fictitiously), identify as a CRA auditor. Never seem to have to wait on hold! They get mad as anything, but at least I get their attention. And, I never, ever go away. If this fails to get results, the consignee is generally considered to be the ultimate beneficiary of the services supplied, and liability will fall on them with the Mercantile Act.
 
Good one about the CRA...I have several (fictious) sisters who work at the CRA...and a couple who work at the IRS (just so any American delinquents don't feel left out)...But your approach is more bold...I'm going to try it out.
 
As far as i am concerned Maski has every right to use whatever is available under the law to collect the money owed to her and the same applies to anyone owed money. There are to many "lowlifes" parading as brokers that have no intention of paying anyone and we as carriers need to stand up for our rights and money. Yes there are good honest brokers out there but the bad ones far out weigh the good ones. My estimation is 25% good 75% lowlife scam artists. I have collected from Brokers customers before and will do it again if needed. I can also tell you i once was an owner operator and i worked for a carrier that went bust. When i found out it was at the last moment and i went direct to the carrier's customers that i had hauled loads for and i managed to get paid for every pc. that i was owed money on. I also did it fairly as i took all my load confirmations to each customer and explained to them how i was paid a percentage of the load and they worked with me. The carrier that went bust got paid his percentage on the load and got paid for the fuel that i used that was charged on his accts. and i got a cheque from his customers for the balance. And now a couple of his former customers are now my customers.
 
Bill of Lading Act is Bill of Lading Act... I don't understand why people would interpret it differently. It's in plain English and makes perfect sense!
 
Now What?

maskigirl said:
here it is..the Manufacturer hired a broker to haul a shipment for them so they didnt have to deal with that part and the broker contacted us to do the job, which we did and on time, now the broker isnt answering my calls and I have been trying for months...so I contacted the *Manufacturer* demanding payment or I would contact the client ...they responded saying that they would take legal action against me if I contacted the *Client* demanding payment..soooo...now what?
Click to expand...

Hello maskigirl,

How did you make out with this? Did you manage to collect or are they forcing your hand?

Regards,

Howard
 
Fax the shipper a copy of small claims suit (assuming they do not owe you over 10 k, or willing to accept 10 k) and let them know you will be including the receiver as co defendant. You may also wish to sue the director of the load broker company as there may be personal liability. Good Luck.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
random thoughts

First.... Small Claims Court Max increased to $25K (at least it did in Ontario).. Small Claims Court - Increase in monetary limit from $10,000 to $25,000 - Ministry of the Attorney General

Second... isn't it kind of similar to how, say a homeowner, could pay a roofing contractor after completing a roofing job, and then the roofing supplier puts a lien on the homeowner's home because the roofing contractor did not pay the roofing supplier?

Third... I don't think the point is exactly to hope that the one party will have to pay twice, it's more of a hope that the scumbag will care enough about his own business to not want that to happen, which may cause him to end up paying.

Fourth.. So say a shipper/manufacturer pays a broker to get his product delivered... it's part of his cost of doing business.. if that broker doesn't pay the carrier, and said carrier comes back to haunt the shipper/manufacturer... and the shipper ends up having to pay twice, God forbid.. he is losing out on some or all of his 'profits' on that product he sold... whereas the carrier is losing out on not only profits, but expenses actually paid out of pocket just to run that load... seems to me that a carrier should try to get his money from whatever resources are legal to him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom