stiffer broker regulations in put please
 

GOOD MORNING !

I am no one important just spent time in this industry as a driver, broker’s agent and now a recruiter.

I am looking for help in a campaign to stiffen the requirements for a Brokers License, make them more expensive and tougher to get. Also regulate those charging a fee upfront to be an agent .

Like all industries there are many fine freight brokers unfortunately we have the bad ones . We need to make it harder to go bankrupt or go out of business with outstanding bills ,trucks unpaid ,and agent’s unpaid . Yet go across the street to open agin under a new name . To do it all agin!

Thank you for your time

If you want to make it more difficult to get broker authority, then perhaps we should do the same thing for common or contract authority. I don't think more regulations are the answer. If you check these brokers out it is less likely that you will have a problem. I think having a means to share information about brokers would do more to deter bad behavior with them than anything else. The reason most will have problems with brokers is due to not checking them out and getting the paperwork in order. There have been some who would like to see the broker bond set to $100,000. That will not stop dishonest brokers from doing business. It will limit competition and the number of brokers who can enter the business. I think we need less regulation, not more.

Actually setting the bond at $100,000 makes the problem worse. With a $100,000 bond the broker has more time to stall and run up more in freight bills before he disappears. Carriers think that as soon as they file on a bond, the bonding company starts deducting so the carrier can recover. WRONG, the bond company is an insurer, he doesnt want to pay. He calls the deliquent broker and says pay the carrier. The broker says okay and continues to not pay freight bills and then disappears now the bond company wants the carrier to go after the shipper or whoever was responsible for the freight bill. The shipper says that broker was your agent Mr Carrier, not mine, so we arent paying. Now you go back to the bonding company and they agree to pay you 3 cents on the dollar, so your $3900 invoice is now going to pay you $117.00. That scenario is in the $10,000 surety bond world. Imagine if the bond was $100,000. You should carefully check out a broker whether you are a carrier or wanting to be an agent for the broker.

That's interesting LOAD IT. What good is the bond then?

The bond won't stop an unethical or dishonest broker from doing business. There are many businesses in this country that does business on credit without the benefit of having a bond. I think we would be just as well off without having a bond at all. Your best best is to check out a broker and their references before extending credit to them. If they don't check out then you can either require them to prepay, COD or not do business with them at all. The only thing a bond will do is provide some assurance to those who don't want to take the time to check out those with whom they do business. I usually don't do business with anyone who doesn't have a credit score of at least 92. The other day I found a good paying load that went where I wanted to go. The problem is that the broker had a credit score of 78. I would not do business with them. With that score he may have paid me, but would likely have taken much longer than I want. He also may not have paid. I have too many other things to concern myself than running someone down to collect my money. All a bond will really do is raise flags to the next guy who checks the bond. Checking their credit will do the same thing without getting burned.

I am not looking at the bond issue as much as so other isues so that not just everyone can get a brokers lic ...DRIVERS you have to have a CDL take a test makes you accountable state to state . you have more restrictions on the way you run your business than a broker........It would add a bit of professnalism to brokers.......as it did to drivers .......need to look at broker schools regulate them like drivings schools are regulated ..make everyone accountable . and raise the cost to get a lic from 300.00 to 1000.00 .

For me it starts with testing both brokers and agents, every other industry has testing why not trucking you can not just say your a real estate , or stock broker same should be done here . Why should brokers and agents be accountable just like drivers?

The CDL didn't make drivers more professional. In fact, I see less professionalism today than I did 30 years ago. All it really did was increase the cost of getting into this business. Throwing more regulations on an already over burdened industry won't solve the problem. A broker is basically a salesman. I don't see that requiring a salesman to get a license or take a test would make them more professional. Back in the 70's California required car salesmen to have a license. They may still require it. I don't think it made them more professional. It did create a new tax for a state which can't manage their money. When you put more regulations on ANY industry, you only discourage the better people from entering or staying in the industry. Just look at hazmat. Many good drivers and owner operators are choosing to not pay the extortion money to keep their hazmat endorsement. Paying the extra fee won't make these drivers more professional nor will it make our country safer. It is a scam or shell game to make millions of dollars for a few. New drivers will get the endorsement because some companies require it. Much of the freight that is considered hazmat should not be considered as such. It is amazing to me how we got along in this country for decades without excessive testing and hazmat endorsements. I am not sure how you would test brokers to make sure that they were professional. All it would do is increase a beauracracy that is already bloated. If it were left up to me I would get rid of most of the regulations we have in this industry, including logs. Most of them do little for safety. Additional regulations or licensing will do nothing to develop character or encourage dishonest brokers from doing business. If anything, it may keep good people from entering the business. What we need is more people with common sense and those who operate this as a business. In is common sense and good business to check out someone with whom you want to do business. When you go to a bank for a loan, they don't just give you a check. They check your credit. When I first started driving there were drivers who took speed to stay up and drive longer. Not everyone took it, but some did. Today there are probably more people using drugs and driving than back then. The difference is that more are taking harder drugs, such as cocaine to get high. Speed was used to stay away. Cocaine is used to get high. We have more regulations and random drug testing than ever, but people still use drugs. I think in many ways roads are less safe today than 30 years ago. I certainly see more wrecks involving big trucks. If additional testing and regulations really made us safer, then we should never see a truck on it's side. It simply doesn't work.

The businesses you mentioned deal with the public. Brokers mostly deal with business owners ( O/O). The gov't is more inclined to protect the public more than business owners.

I agree that crooked brokers should be shut down. I think some kind of public access to the brokers business record would help more than raising the bond.

In CA they raised the bond requirement for car dealers. The crooked guys just pool their money together to get bonded. The honest Ma & Pop dealer got squeezed.

so maybe it should be the broker schools that are regulated ? not the brokers ?

I don't see how more regulations are going to help people who fail to practice common sense and properly manage their business. If you think that regulations will help brokers schools, just look what has happened to our public schools since the government got so involved. Someone with a high school education 50 years ago is as well or better educated than most college graduates of today. Schools spend so much time on paperwork and documentation to prevent themselves from being sued that they don't have nearly as much time to teach. If you think the government can make things better, just look at how they simplified our tax system. Every time they simplify our taxes they get more complicated and pay more to the government. I don't have a problem with more information sharing, but it should be done by the carriers and private sector not the government. When the government gets involved things generally get worse not better. We can share information about bad brokers on the Internet and with others. That will do more than any government intervention. Carriers need to accept responsibility for checking out those with whom they do business. NEVER depend on government to do for you what you should be doing for yourself.

The business is already regulated. You just want it more regulated, because you want to make it harder to become a broker. Why havent you become a broker? You were an agent for one. I'm sure you have freight/shipper connections. If you want to benefit this industry then start RLJ19 Freight Brokerage and provide high paying freight, pay 100% fuel surcharge, pay detention, use PC miles, offer advances, COD payments, and settle all invoices within 7days. Also setup your office to operate 24/7 7 days a week. Have freight in 48 states for flat, van and reefers. Always put the trucks needs before yours and only make enough profit to barely keep the bills paid.

Does this sound like something you can accomplish? If not, then you need to find another bandwagon to jump on. If you arent the solution, you must be the problem.

no need to get nasty just ask a question to see how the trucking community felt.....The bandwagon would help the o/o not me ..

you guys are all the same you compline about brokers ...but find fault with thoes tring to help you

you compline about low freight ........

I will shut up now ...just stop compling about brokers and low freight on this board and others .. stop crying ....

we shut' em down in 72 but truckers had back bone then and a power voice called the TEAMSTERS.......

I'm not being NASTY, I'm offering you a challenge. I am a broker and my MC starts with 34XXXX, so I didnt start yesterday. I also run trucks and you have to wear a broker hat and a trucker hat. I would like to see a brokerage like RLJ19 Freight Brokerage. That scenario doesnt work for me...YET. I still would like for you to explain why you wont open your own brokerage. This forum may be just what YOU need to improve our industry without worrying about the LOW-LIFE SCUM that will take someone's hard earned money and disappear with it.

Again, I'm not trying to berate you, just offering you a challenge. Most of us truckers would be happy with a broker that could just be honest and hit a few of those points I mentioned. Welcome to the O/O Forum.

The bond is just another part of regulation. Produce and exempt product brokers dont have to have a bond. Why? Those products were once considered too cheap to worry about, so no authority was required to handle them. Check the Regs for EXEMPT products.

I think we are blaming the wrong people for cheap freight. Some like to blame the brokers, and there is some validity to that complaint. However, the main reason freight rates are cheap is due to carriers and owner operators hauling cheap freight. I have had brokers and shippers both tell me there is no reason for them to pay more when carriers will haul it for a cheap rate. They have a valid point. There aren't enough owner operators who are willing to shut down to make a difference. Keep in mind that an owner operator is a businessman, not a driver. Teamsters represent drivers not business owners. There are too many poor businessmen who haul cheap freight. They would rather keep moving at a loss than wait for a load that would pay enough to make a decent profit. They would rather drive than take the time to check out a broker or shipper to see that they can get their money once a load is delivered. Sometimes it is better to take a few hours or a day to take care of business. I don't see the point in hauling a load that you don't know whether you will be paid. You cannot regulate people to be good businessmen. Companies lose money all the time on bad debt. Those who want to keep those loses to a minimum check companies out before extending credit to them. When you allow a broker to pay you in 30 days you are extending them credit. Banks and businesses who extend credit do so only after they check references. When was the last time you received a loan where they didn't ask for references and checked you out? Being a carrier and extending credit is no different. We are each responsible for our success or failure.

Well said Gman. ALWAYS check out anyone who you plan to haul for. You can still book the load and than check them out before sending the broker your info and signing a rate confirmation. BTW Mike,I may owe you 2 steak dinners now. The first offer expired. :lol: Are you gonna run thru the longhorn anytime soon?

I am sorry to have missed the first steak dinner, DD60. We are debating whether to come out for Christmas. I would love to visit with the family during the holiday.

Bonnie aka Maxine wrote:
Load it, what do you think about always writing and initialing the following on every contract and confirmation - "Broker i'sn't acting as agent for the carrier."

If the broker is acting as an agent for the carrier, then there should be complete disclosure of all funds. In fact, if the broker is an agent then it should be up to the carrier to establish an acceptable level of compensation for the broker. In addition, if the broker is an agent for the carrier, then there should be no need to have a back solicitation clause in the agreement.

In the freight world that we work in, broker gets loads from shipper, brokers posts load, carrier calls broker. The majority of the time, the broker is an agent of the shipper to find trucks and move their product. When all is well who cares. When the broker has abscounded with the funds and the shipper may have to pay the carrier, the shipper then says the broker was not his agent, he was yours, the carrier.

If I had a problem with the broker not paying and could not collect, I would go after the shipper. When all is said and done, regardless of what is in the contract, the shipper is ultimately responsible for paying the carrier. In any case, the shipper should be made aware of the broker not paying the carrier for services rendered. If it comes down to going to court, it is probably a good idea to name the shipper in the suit along with the broker. People don't like to be sued. If you want to get rid of some of these problem brokers who close and set up shop under another name, this could be a good start. If a shipper gets sued for not paying a carrier and then sets up shop under another name, I guarantee you that the shipper won't do business with him again.