Buggers finally got me, double broker scam.

I guess I could be confused, but it seems like there would be so many red flags for the carrier if the freight bills don't match where they picked up or the amounts are off in what is being paid. It doesn't really matter anyway, because the potential side effects seem like they're worse for brokers than being scammed once in a blue moon.

 

"being scammed once in a blue moon." LOL You are way out of touch. Estimates are over 100 million a year.
How can the feds require any shipper to put the rate/carrier on the BOL's?

 

ez photoshop job for sure.. could have it done in 5 minutes

 

You don't think 1 in several thousand is once in a blue moon? 100 million a year sounds like a lot until you consider how many billions are in the industry. I don't think I'm out of touch at all. It sucks when it happens, it shouldn't happen, but at the end of the day brokers are still making money. All I'm saying is that if allowing access to the freight bills cut down on fraud, which maybe somehow it wouldn't, that 100 million saved would probably be less than what would be lost due to being back doored or undercut or whatever problem would happen by not having carriers waive their rights.

 

I think the easy fix is a loadboard designed for direct freight. The loadboard would allow shippers/receivers to post loads directly to available carriers. Shippers,Receivers and Carriers would all have ratings and reviews that would prove their honesty or lack thereof. There could be a detailed history of loads hauled for carriers at the click of a button.

Any shipper/receiver that's capable of sending load info to a broker would be more than capable of posting loads to a loadboard. The savings of direct freight would more than offset any additional paperwork costs incurred by the shippers/receivers. A proper rating/review system would greatly reduce late/missing loads or no-shows on the carriers part.

I feel like brokers are a major part of the problem simply due to the lack of transparency. Broker A may be upstanding and a great dude but due to the way the business works it allows Broker B to pose as a carrier prior to relisting loads as Broker B... I say get rid of the brokers and put it all out in the open, if brokers wanna play phone tag or fax BOL's they could just go get a job in a lumber mill or steel mills shipping dept.

As a carrier I clearly have a one-sided approach on how to solve the issue!

 

I'll go with the carriers name on the BOL's. That would help. But explain how the rate on the BOL's/copy of the freight charge would? That just goes to the old tired I don't know how much I should get, broker makes too much whining.

 

Main reason is the shipper doesn't want to deal with all the BS from 100's of carriers. I realize everyone on here is an upstanding carrier but the reality is just the opposite.

And there are direct shipper sites. They all are bid down to the lowest one.

 

If you got any local Charlotte freight, give us a call. Problem solved for that area

 

Can you believe some trucker texts agents a video onsite when arriving, when loaded and departing (secured/tarped), when arriving onsite at receiver: prior to and after being unloaded- notes any and all damages prior to shipment leaving origination; shows truck including DOT # states who exactly the broker is, lists BOL # and gives a nice look around.


No wonder people love me
:0



every ####### and their brother has a camera phone anymore.

 

im not smack talking you @PPDCT
Thats what I do; and I don’t see any reason for anyone not to? Its too easy to do