Making your own agreements for broker

The rate con is more important than the contract in many ways. Most contracts specifically mention that the information on the rate con takes precedence over the agreement. Your best and easiest bet is to put a solid accessorial policy together and have them agree to it on a per load pre-negotiated basis. Things change fast in this business so rolling with the punches helps you in the long run to weather the nasty parts of the circle.

Somerset Logistics hired me to pick a load up in Indianapolis and when I was about 5 miles away they cancelled. Well, I had my policy on the rate con that included a $150 TONU. I told her it was no big deal things happen and I understand. At least I had my TONU to cover my loss. She responds that Somerset doesn't pay TONU unless the carrier arrives at the shipper before the load is cancelled. I told her to read my policy as it's not worded in such a way and she signed the rate con agreeing.

She tried very hard to burn me on that charge. Well, it didn't work for her. They paid and it was because I'm adamant about handling these little details before I move the truck. Even my detention policy is worded in my favor 100 percent. It clearly states THE CARRIER determines in/out times, not their dirtbag customers. I don't even bill it all the time when I'm running for a regular customer but it's there when I need it.

 

Just wondering, are you a multi-truck operator, or a single truck?

 

Single truck, multiple trailers.

 

Most BROKER/CARRIER agreements include something like this section.

I would think that crossing out and adding additional provisions, terms, etc, (by the carrier) would be meaningless unless they agree to it in writing, as has been stated already.

As for me, this is one reason why I just try and do business (when possible) with the same group of trusted brokers over and over. Every now and then I might run a short load for someone I'm not too familiar with. However, I'm not extending credit to such for thousands of dollars, that's for sure.

 

I had asked a question in this forum about a month ago that amounted to "who wins?". For example, if their contract states all that, and I write something on the rate con to the effect of "if you accept me as a carrier, all protections afforded to you in your contract are null and void, and this rate con represents the new contract", who wins in that case? Seems to me brokers can declare whatever they want in their contract, and then a new contract with a more recent date can break it all. I never got a clear answer.

 

If both parties agree to it in writing it's binding. However, this isn't always the case. Indemnity Clauses are a perfect example. Most of the country now has put forth legislation that's not recognizing said clauses and renders them unenforceable/illegal. Check out Seaton and Husk in VA. They're an amazing firm with a mountain of knowledge. Seaton's, "Rules of The Road" is a valuable resource if one chooses to sit down and read it. I think the bottom line here is that the carrier needs to be looking out for their best interests and needs to be willing to walk if they aren't happy with the terms. The legalities are mostly common sense. Be happy or don't haul it!

 

Credit is another great piece of the puzzle that needs to be considered. Many carriers don't even do a credit check before they haul for a new brokerage. It amazes me how many people are willing to lend a perfect stranger thousands of dollars with zero collateral. I field calls daily and at least a couple times a week I have to turn a brokerage down due to their poor credit. I don't do many but when it's a run that's going to have an invoice value over $2500 I call the surety bond holder to see if there are any pending claims or issues even if their credit is currently showing as acceptable.