A carrier has lost a legal battle over who is responsible for paying for the $8.5 million of mostly uninsured cargo that was stolen out of one of their vehicles. A judge awarded almost $6 million to the broker after they filed a claim alleging that the carrier was contractually responsible for any damage that occurred during shipment.
The carrier, Southern Refrigerated Transport, a subsidiary of Covenant Transportation Group, had a full shipment of pharmaceuticals stolen from them while the truck was in a rest area. The pharmaceutical company had hired Excel, who in turn hired SRT to move the freight. When the freight was stolen, Excel filed a claim for $8,583,671.12 which was the total alleged value of the lost goods.
SRT refused to pay the $8.5m because the value on the bill of lading was listed at $56,766.36 and, they argued, under the Carmack Amendment, their liability should be limited to the value on the bill of lading.
Despite the apparent miscommunication, the judge’s pretrial ruling was that SRT would still be bound by the transportation contract they signed which had them accepting responsibility for the full value of the goods.
“At this stage, we are reviewing our options and expect to appeal the decision,” said David R. Parker, chairman, president, and CEO of Covenant.
Next Story: Smart Truck Parking System To Roll Out Nationwide
Source: overdrive, truckinginfo, bizjournals
kidde says
This should serve as a precaution for those who haul hv freight, or all freight for that matter. Make it a habit to secure your freight, every load, every time.
harry s monster says
at the rate things are going to day..these issues are sending out one very significant precaution to anyone who has any business intelligence scruples morals or ethics to simple NOT get involved in this industry or to get out before it gets worse. This is proving to be quite accurate as more of the skilled knowledgeable and value conscience drivers are walking away leaving only the careless and fly by nights to do the job..I am on the road and i am seeing significant affects of DOT rules and legal issues that are amassing around drivers and the behaviours that are supposed to improve..and significantly much worse..the big companies are pushing bodies into trucks in furious race to grab freight from one another and smash all the small independents out of business and you can be sure this business behaviour will get much worse before it gets better..before we cripple the industry..and face another national crisis..
harry s monster says
what you can rely on is human behavior..if company doesnt practice any real hard core ethics in its hiring and driver treatment..they dont really care bout much of anything other than that immediate dollar..and that is the national mentality now..Its the immediate dollar..for today..We dont give a damn what happens down the road..We are convinced that we can get super rich if we just go all out the way we are doing and take as much as we can..There is indeed some study and some ethics practiced thats keeping us from being complete savages..but we are teetering and the effects show on the road..Driving is becoming more savage..The radio is near silent except for angry outburst from disgruntled miserable and usually not so intelligent drivers that are inundating the roads..The caring considerate drivers are turning off their radios in disgust of what they are hearing.
But getting back to the buck..when that is all that our eyes see and consider then we dont see the effects..We dont have too. We can throw another body in the truck to replace the incedent that disrupted the income flow. Its all legal battles..Lawyers are having a feeding frenzy..its a buffet of legalities that we are battling and its all about who will get the buck that was at risk. To hell with spending money investigating deeply anything. Just let the lawyers battle it out..THe Dot does phoney worthless studies to support its laws and rules and they have an agenda and it isnt safety..Thats what the public is told..to gain the confidence and keep away scrutiny. Its politcal showman ship that keeps the public from demanding real solid safety laws that work..and not just work for wellness of the community in every aspect. That everyone is held accountable in the industry and we get back to ethical business not legal business….Our national ethics are getting really fuzzy and blurry..Hard to make em out..We here we are..but we dont see it..Who is bellowing out good morals anymore? Thats pretty much shunned by all levels of government and business…and yet without them..We didnt see..the giant tree falling on us..We have done so much damage to so many industries because we simple said to hell with ethics..and we will just do legal practices…which are legal..not ethical…So long as the law allows it..no law was written to stop me..Ill do it if it makes a buck…Crack dealers are moving up in social class because they have money..not morals..
Honestjohn says
Experienced professional responsible drivers refuse to be DISRESPECTED and ABUSED by SRT(Covenant) so they go elsewhere to work. So a High Value load gets stolen because they cant put a professional on the load? Too bad ! Hope this unethical , driver hating company get exactly…what they have been deserving. A heartless greedy bunch of management! Have a good day! 🙂 Honestjohn
Raul says
The bigger the lock, the more likely a criminal will want to see what’s inside…
R Wolf says
A pharmaceutical load is always HV and due to the increased warehouse thefts is most likely inside information. As to value I hauled one of those loads and was told after the fact the convoy had a minimum value of $6m and A high value of $57M. These are just by shipper very high and with how thieves are going high tech these type loads are more so team to protect.
It takes seconds to enter a truck thanks to the Government. The vin on the side allows thieves to identify the key for the list. To disable the quallcomm takes seconds. So it takes 2 people and old tech to protect these items. Tech can be overridden. A cell jammer cuts the tracking system in the trailer. So don’t blame the driver for taking a whiz or the lock. I can destroy a lock in 10 seconds. High school chemistry class showed a frozen lock hit by a hammer and shattering.
John says
When will drivers learn that what they transport can be very valuable. Put a lock on it, every time and every load. Don’t make it easy for thieves who are becoming more and more resourceful on stealing freight. My company frowns on certain parking options because of the lack of security and well lit areas. For me its just standard procedure to put a lock on a load.
tp says
Where did it say there was no lock on the trailer? And if there was, locks are just to keep honest people honest.
Honestjohn says
SRT cant keep professional responsible drivers.They got caught on this High Value load being stolen. No tears for SRT(Covenant).
Donna Kelly says
And no one saw a thing..I’d appeal to pay bill of lading amount..
harry s monster says
naturally a question worth digging in hard on..How many pallets were there? how much weight was involved..Rest areas are generally much quieter than truck stops..the space is usually minimal to get in behind a truck..id say youd have to be parked next to the truck..with a truck and moving it from one van to the next..quite a bit of labor…Theres lots of suspects here..including the shipper…I mean sending out 56 g worth of goods and collecting 8 million for it aint a bad take for any company for a days work…theres a rat somewhere in the mix
ACES says
What is that, bulk value vs street value? smdh
Nic says
Really though, if a shipment was worth 8 million, what good would a padlock do? The thieves would just carry bolt cutters. How did they know what was inside? Contents are not written on the side of the trailer. So it would seem to me that someone on the inside was in on this theft.
Joe Skeptical says
It was an inside job, obviously.
Honestjohn says
Bolt and one or two approved locks. Driver who stays with the load..continuouslly!
Brian Van Ausdle says
First things first, how do you know the driver didn’t lock his/her trailer.
Second if they did they probably used a company issued lock (easily defeated)
Breaking in isn’t that hard unless better precautions are taken to secure the trailer.
Next THE CARRIER knowing of the high value should have had
additional insurance. So let’s not hammer the driver unless you know the facts
and I don’t believe the carrier should be let off the hook.
Jeremy says
If the bill of laden is only $56000 then how would a carrier know it had a 8 million dollar value in order to make sure it’s insured?
tp says
The bill of lading stated the value was $57,000. After goods was stolen they were informed it was over 8 million dollars. From west I read the company is accepting the stated value they were told the load was worth on paper work, not what they were told after load was stolen. I side with the trucking company here since they weren’t told of the high value of the load from the start, they didn’t even have a chance to provide extra security or precautions. I feel they are liable for what the broker stated the value was on paper, we all know why the broker stated less on paper, to get cheaper freight rate.
Rubberduckie says
*check out the forums by the way. Lots of bad reviews of this company’s treatment of its drivers and pay on there. Just sayin. They usually have large orientations and seem like a meat grinder company. You get what you pay for folks. This rule is not exclusive to consumers.
Robert says
It’s time this carrier had some problems. They do treat the drivers like crap and don’t want to pay anymore than they have to pay. They are a low pay beginning driver company. They won’t pay for experience cause that’s not what they want.
Honestjohn says
Thats true….they cant keep newby drivers or professional responsible drivers. Management disrespects drivers-and the leave within a year or two.And they wont ever go back! Hold you head up dri ers!
Don says
Good for SRT and Covenant.
Eddie says
The declared value on the BOL should be the limit of the liability. Any carrier and driver handles a $6 million load differently than a $56,000.00 load. Looks like the shipper is really sticking it to the carrier. How long does it take to unload $6m of freight? Nobody saw anything? Just disappeared?
Nobleagle says
It’s all a conspiracy from the shipper to the broker to the truck line right down to the driver. There was/is money to be made off this load. My question is, How did the driver not feel the movement of the trailer doors as they were being opened & the boogy men walking the length of the load to get it out?
mykhailo says
this is not a coincidence. who let the thiefs know that this particular truck caries such an expensive load? how come the driver nor anyone around had noticed a thing? if it was a regular rest area, lots of drivers would pass the trailer and would have noticed the robery. plus where did the thiefs stord the load? another truck? so ghey were prepared anc it was a set i
up. unlikely they were doing that to steal 20 pallets of rice.
pocketchange says
I’d say Parker and Company have lost the value of this load as written on the bill (no more, no less) unless a signed document is no longer a valid contractual agreement. Never, have I ever not been paid per a written contractual agreement (one way or another.)
This would not be the first time a shipper has (attempted and got caught) stuck it to a carrier OR an owner operator.
Parker.. you loose this and don’t appeal, you can easily be replaced.
Counter with a fraud suit and get damages for your troubles if the shippers’ legal department is ignorant enough..
This is way past being a simple insurance claim.. pc
Claude Davis says
That BOL amount usually states the RVNX amount is per pound.(Release Value Not to Exceed)
An Aircuff Lock would have prevented this theft but evidently the carrier was to cheap to supply all their drivers with them.
harddazeknight says
Hey Claude,
Looks like you have knowledge about the heist contrary to that provided by this article. Nowhere does it say that the trailer, or tractor/trailer combo, was stolen along with the load of pharmaceuticals. The Aircuff lock only ensures that no one can release the tractor/trailer air brakes–nothing to do with securing the load within the confines of the trailer. I, and apparently most other commenters, assumed that someone(s) cut the lock on the trailer and took only the load… not the trailer. The article does say that the “cargo that was stolen OUT (emphasis added) of one of their vehicles” so I can’t quite figure out how the truck/trailer being immobilized would have made any difference.
John says
Instead of following the Carmack Amendment rules, the judge has allowed the shipper to compute the cost using the Cleverly Rigged Accounting Practice rule…CRAP for short.
EPASUX says
EXACTLY
jeremy says
a lock don’t mean nothing if a thief wants something they will do what ever it takes to get it
Joe Skeptical says
That’s right.
todd says
This just proves it is OK for a shipper to misrepresent the value or category of the freight.guess it’s not falsifying a federal document?
Laurel says
Good point, was wondering the same thing. Now, who benefits from misrepresenting the value of a load? There would be the explanation I’d guess. And has this carrier never heard of Freight Watch, the company used by other high value carriers to track such loads and enforce safety precautions from pick up to delivery ? All this discussion of locks is absurd. These aren’t solo punks anymore, they are highly organized criminal gangs that prey on HV loads. They’ll take the whole trailer or whole rig or blow the lock off or blow the driver’s head off….whatever it takes to grab that load. Locks-Smocks, they could care less. The broker should have hires a carrier that uses professional security measures to keep drivers and freight safe.
Honestjohn says
A Team ..2 Professional Drivers with the truck moving 24/7 from shipper to consignee! This load paid carrier very very well. Worth the extra security! SRT screwed up…
Keith says
I wouldn’t be surprised if the facts are skewed a bit here. Hard to believe the cargo was unloaded from the trailer. It seems more likely the truck/trailer was stolen with cargo inside.
They will win on appeal. If they declared the value incorrectly, that’s on the shipper. I’d refuse a load worth $6M if I had to take responsibility for the full value unless the shipper agreed to pay for the additional insurance rider. The carrier wasn’t given the option to assess their full risk because it wasn’t properly disclosed. Our country is full of stupid judges who make bad decisions.
harry s monster says
AMEN..and that has to be taken into account nowadays..We have more and more judges with high levels of incompetence and unfortunately with greedy deep pockets..so much corruption from the top of the country has allowed it to run amuck down the line..so we are seeing more and more dirty judges or just ignorant judges..
bill says
They stole the truck dummies
Kendal says
Inside job I mean do you think it was a random theft someone knew what was in the trailer.
sherry says
I agree.
I suspect inside job…..and not necessarily the driver.
I cant believe a broker would take on such a movement without special insurance.
And….why wasn’t the top of the trailer marked so it could be spotted from the air ?
I mean a $10.00 investment in bright colored duct tape could have been a great investment.
And -IF-the shipper did declare this shipment value as $56K, then I think the judge should honor that. How much was the broker charge for this load? Was it in the realm of normal
freight charges or was it for a $8million dollar load ?
And WHY isn’t this pharmaceutical company shipping the load in two trucks if the load is
so valuable or having it tailed ?
aj says
$8 million worth of drugs!!!! was it a load of pure cocaine???
sudon't says
Have you filled a prescription lately? I’ve had to pay a couple hundred dollars for a handful of pills that gave me no jollies. And you can fit a lot of pills in a 53′ trailer.
EPASUX says
Could be heroin, OxyContin and or oxycodone
harry s monster says
lol yoiu could fit 8 million dollars of cocaine in yer suv practically..ya kidding
jon says
The shipper declared a value well within insurance limits then changed the rules later. This is fraud. If they had declared the true value they would have had to pay a lot more in freight.
That is fraud to the letter. Misrepresentation.
Would you haul that load without extra pay if you kknew you were responsible for the value.
sudon't says
Right. I’m sure they low-balled the value of the load to save money elsewhere, probably on insurance. Now that the insurance won’t pay, suddenly they come up with the actual value. I like trucking companies about as much as I like brokers, but I think the trucking company is in the right here.
Joe Skeptical says
+1
EPASUX says
+2
Cherokee says
Irregardless weather or not the driver is at fault that’s for SRT to decide ,the carrier should not
be held accountable for any more than the bill of lading says t he load is worth. Companies lis
list load values lower on BOL’s for several reasons #1 is to try and deter thieves away from HV loads #2 so they don’t have to insure such a high value( which will raise there insurance and no
one will haul it as cheap knowing the risks) #3 Drivers won’t want to move it without higher pay
due to higher risk especially with pharmaceuticals and increased street value. #4 Don’t forget the taxes that will cost them. I hauled computers for a while and there was never a value on the bills,
but the carrier and the shipper both agreed they not be on the driver’s copy and the billing copy
have the full load value, so either the broker tried to get over on SRT or the shipper tried to screw them all on rates or insurance. I think they need to check the shippers financial records and see
if there in debt, they may have stolen it themselves just to get a payday and my guess the driver was in on it. (Can’t see unloading a whole trailer in a rest area without him feeling the trailer moving just a little bit)
LouieV says
If I was the carrier with a $8.5M load I’d be treating it like a load of cash and have shipper pay for an escort…problem solved.
Joe Skeptical says
If they don’t tell you, or say $50K (in other words, they LIE TO YOU) then what?
Brian says
High value loads should NEVER!! Be left un attended, and for the company, it’s a shame they don’t have the proper people in place to insure the company isn’t put in a position like this. And that includes both, driver and corporate. The carrier was negligent in securing the load regardless, and for that matter, they might be responceable for other damages resulting from this, “think about it”
Shippers should be more aware of who they hire to carry there freight and in a case like this , a shipment of medical supplies, it should be assigned to only carriers specializing this freight type,.
Cliff Downing says
Not been a good season for SRT. A year ago, one of their drivers died in their truck and the refused to help the spouse get the body home. Now they are on the hook for a major freight loss. Anyone see a pattern emerging? Whenever I have seen similar situations with carriers, I see a major failure of management to have a grasp on the company. It is hard to reign in things when they start failing, so be on the lookout for a carrier that will be awash in problems and have to dissolve. And since Covenant Transport is the parent company, it reflects on them as well. Not a good sign.
Joe Skeptical says
But they quoted a cheap rate and that sweet honey brought all the bees buzzing. Turns out cheap is expensive but not in the trucking business! No way man, trucking companies defy reality!
The shipper’s insurance either didn’t pay or the cargo insurer did, and is subrogating (attempting recovery) Not likely.
EPASUX says
Nope, don’t see a pattern. This has nothing to do with what you allegedly claim they did. If story holds and they were not aware if HV load of $8mil, I dont blame them for one sec. Your anger is misplaced, it should be with shipper and broker.
William says
Srt is one company that drivers need to stay away from. Tony and Justin Smith are not good people to deal with. They don’t give a hoot about the drivers, the very backbone of the company !!
William says
SRT is “Self-Insured” and that too needs to be illegal.
Virginpacific says
This should be a wake up call for regulator and American truckers that insurance should be a legal requirements. I carry $130,000.00 coverage ongoing all the time.My shippers sign a value contract and what they want to be covered for.
Corey Jackson says
Damn, sounds like somebody needs to investigate these brokers. Something stinks to high heaven on this.
Walter Kurycz says
That is why you back up your doors to an inmovable object such as a building. Think smarter!
Joe Skeptical says
If you can and you know there are eight million dollars inside. Even so, they can steal the whole rig.
George says
This is nothing new..
at our job we had a full load of cheap whiskey stolen, bol declared 35K in value.
When insurance asked shipper for value they declared 150K, then insurance saw the bol.
They asked shipper why he did change the declared value from 35K to 150K ..shipper never answered and hide…
stephen says
Thieves steal entire trailers. We had an incident last year where a tow truck pulled into a truck stop, hooked up to the truck and dragged the entire thing away. All while the driver was inside taking a shower. From the time of the last QC msg from the driver until he returned and reported his truck missing was less than 40 minutes.
We found the tractor a couple blocks away. They had simply dropped the trailer, pulled the tractor out, then hooked up with another tractor and were gone.
No one saw a thing.
We found the trailer more than a thousand miles away about two months later.
So you see, ANY high value load is at risk. We now don’t haul HV loads other than with teams and someone must stay with the truck/trailer at all times.
Joe Skeptical says
And armed, ’cause they will be, count on it.
j****h2 says
Covenet has a bad reputation. Always worries me when I see a business displaying religious symbols on their trucks or store fronts. Most of them are usually crooks. Use religion to sucker you.
Jraulpilot says
Well::;Are Load brokers really needed??
*I think is best to deal directly with the O/O….and or the Carriers. Why?*For starts; knowledge of the Load. (you make the analysis. *also the money goes to the One that “actually DOES THE JOB”………there are lots of other reasons….; Not enough space.
David says
Who even really knows what was inside… Opps lost a load… OH yeah that load well you have special stuff on it really expensive… but in reality it wasn’t there….. I would say prove to me that the load was 8 million worth, and explain why 1 you didn’t tell me it was 8 million worth and 2 how am I supposed to insure it for 8 million when you tell me a way lower number.
EPASUX says
Exactly! If they signed contract for the value of $56k they should be renal insole to insure the load for that amount. Like you said, how can they prove what was on the trailer? On yea BOL for 8mil but original stated $56k !
There has to be more to this story or this judge is strain up idiot!
Honestjohn says
They takes pictures of product on pallets being loaded..sometimes!
Rob S says
How does anyone know the load was worth $8mil? Could well be a case of attempted insurance fraud.
Joe Skeptical says
This article does not give many important details, such as:
1. Was the trailer stolen, the tractor also OR was the trailer opened and property removed?
2. Where was the driver?
3. If the trailer stayed put, what locks were in place? How were they defeated?
A meat lock can be opened with a sledgehammer easily, and the noise covered by another passing truck, bolt cutters cannot be heard from the cab or sleeper of a tractor. Trailer doors are usually 55 to 60 feet away.
The shipper materially misrepresented the cargo; the trucker can argue they would have reused the load knowing its value and description. The shipper will say it does so to avoid risk.
I’d bet a dime to a doughnut hole the trailer was loaded with something like Vicodin and the theft was an inside job.
catfish says
Covenant transport and SRT are terrible companies. I worked for covenant for six years. I can say that they do have procedures for high value, constant security loads. You have to drive 200 miles from shipper without stopping. When I worked there they only used teams for these loads. It sounds like shipper and broker declared cheaper freight so they could save on shipping cost. As for insurance covenant and set are self insured up to the first million then insurance company kicks in. Im sure Srt wasn’t aware this was a high value constant security load.
andrew says
I agree with that,the broker declared a lesser value so he can get the freight move for cheaper while charging his customer big bucks to move the freight. he knew that if he declared a high value shipment he have to a lot more. The broker should be liable for the claim above the value he declared on the shipping documents.
Candi says
Used to be one key fit all SRT trucks when they had frtlnrs. If that’s still the case it would be real easy to drive off with one. When I hauled HV with prime the load was split on 2 trucks, they had to stay together and never left unattended. Still, the judgement is ludicrous, encouraging shippers to deceive carriers then profiting from illegal documentation.
Ray says
Would somebody please explain to me why trucking companies don’t ensure their loads? Who risks millions of dollars to a truck driver and a padlock?
EPASUX says
Trucking companies do insure it, that’s the problem.
Ray says
The story says the load was mostly uninsured.
Ray says
How is it a problem if they do insure the loads?
EPASUX says
It was insured, and if the cargos worth was $56k like it was stated on BOL this wouldn’t be a story. Trucking company insured the load for what was stated on the BOL plus some, but load ended up being HV ($8mil) and that’s the part that’s not insured.
I do t see how can they hold trucking company liable for something they didn’t know nor did they sign the BOL with worth of $8mil.
How can they prove that load was worth $8mil, when original BOL states $56k
Ray says
I see, thanks for clarifying.
harry s monster says
Id say some serious FBI probing into records and evidence of the actual products existance..follow the paper trail of the drug itself and see that it was in fact a real product that was moved into that trailer…So much not said bout this..
Honestjohn says
More like ..a Bolt put on by shipper..then company approved padlock..even a Cable too!
Legalezze says
All trucking companies, no matter what size they are should cease doing any further business with the freight broker and shipper that set up this load.
andrew says
SRT should only be liable for the amount that was disclosed on the bill of lading. if the broker had disclosed the true value of the freight,I’m pretty sure that SRT would have put team drivers on that shipment. and also ensure proper security measures in place.
flatbed70 says
Land star is right. Everyone is forgetting one thing… How much wld you pay to have 8 million dollars shipped for you?? I say let them recoop the 56k they listed on the BOL. Just shows you how much companies get taken advantage of by thinking its cheap freight, and that trickles down to the most important people, the drivers!!
EPASUX says
So, when I was transporting slot machines to Vegas they had me in the convoy, one black unmarked SUV in front and one in the back. Every time I stopped one of the SUV was monitoring truck and trailer. So if casinos can do it pharma should be able to do it as well, after all these are drugs!
And all this talk about locks hehe if professional thief wants to get In He/she will no matter of the size or quantities of the locks.
shakenbake says
Question, from previous legal years of training, prior to myself and my husbands team truck driving days. I do believe that the law states that the bill of lading is a contract that the driver must sign upon his shippers product is placed upon his truck, and they release the items in his care. The law guidelines per dot, csa, fmsca, states that the drivers signed vol from the shipper must show a description of product shipped, item count number, date shipped , with the receivers name address. Also the law specifies that it must show a weight amount that will be shipped, along with high value loads they get a prior bond verification from the carrier before shipper is released the load, even before the carrier can even be given that hv and govt controlled type products . again, why is s shipper sending pharmaceuticals uncontrolled with better carrier bond coverage. Also, they are charging to sold products all the way to shelves revenue loss amounts. who’s yo say all products would make shelve sale full revenue….
SRT. I drove for you before, you did me ok. I suggest you get better attorneys, ones that do there jobs…i would of even won this case…….it all goes back to the shipper, the govt controlling legal guidelines of shipments. Shipping bonds provided at first contract for shipment liability clause from your companies top out amount……..check your bonds legal limits, liability clauses…or make a better top out liability limit.
sue the shipper for fraudulently and misleading, bol shippers provided detailed information
The shipper van even be fined for not put a very close estimate of the shipping weight. Item numbers shipped. That’s what the driver signs for the carrier as there part of the contractual agreement……..come on people….even the government has rules and guidelines of just what they can do….even csa believe it or not…..
harry s monster says
Id sue the hell out of the shipper..they want 8…fine..Go for 24 million from them…
david says
He was at a rest area and heard nothing and no one seen nothing…right!
david says
SRT left a dead driver and did nothing to get him home! ask the family!
Ray says
Maybe companies will start investing in better security. A trucker and a padlock hardly seems adequate to secure millions of dollars.
Outlaw says
I always drove straight through whenever I hauled a HV load and most of the time just because I could. The sooner you get the load to the receiver and off your truck the less problems you have but then I was the kind of driver that didn’t “follow the rules”; I just got the freight there safely and on time.
Brian says
I hope that recovery is limited to the value of the freight listed on the BOL. Seems like someone along the line was trying to cash in on a lower rate by reclassifying a HV load as non-HV. Most likely it was Exel that pocketed the difference, but I’m sure we’ll find out as the case progresses if no settlement is reached. This was a pretrial ruling.
nofilter says
How can they bill them for $8.5 million when what they signed for is $56,766.36.
That’s crazy, they should only be liable for what they signed for……
I agree it should all be secured really good, I agree there should be more security like cameras on the back of the container. I also believe companies should all have really good cargo insurance.
But I totally disagree if you have to pay for something more than what you signed for.
Struggling says
This story makes me shake my head and curse how it is so hard for me to make money yet others as dumb as this trucking company make millions.
Like the overpaid athlete the drives drunk instead of shelling out 1/100000th of his pay for a limo, any trucking company letting $8-mill walk out the door without a shotgun escort is just asking for it, I don’t care if the trailer is locked.
Think about it–pharmaceuticals are not cash, but if you where a thief, and you had a way to fence these drugs for say even $500k, would a locked trailer stop you?
I think the $56k on the BOL is not a misprint–I think the shipper does not wish for the $8-mil printed on the paperwork.
Tanya Ayling says
I was concerned about myself being liable for a load that I had to leave with a crooked fly by night so called company that I had quit working for. They gave me non existing stops, addresses that they expected me to go to and then threatened to report the truck stolen when I didn’t go to the stops! Then once I returned the tractor trailer (loaded) to the business (their house) they refused to pay me for the work I did…
Tanya Ayling says
I was simply trying to go to work to make a little money and may as well have gotten robbed by the so called company that I worked for. I wouldn’t put it past those crooks to sell the load that I had to leave in their possession…