Is OOIDA worth it?

What would really stop you from being taken by a broker, regardless if the bond is $10,000 or a million? You still have the hassle of filing a claim and the likely hood that you will not recover all that was promised. All that increasing the bond does is knock out the competition for the big brokers, and then they can manipulate the rates to suit themselves. It just takes out the competition, and it is really only the big brokers who win.

Checking a broker's ratings and claims against them (all public) is a far better solution. As far as double or triple brokering, I could care less. If what the broker is paying is what I will haul it for, then there is no problem. No one is forced to haul for less than what it cost to do it and make a profit.

I sure don't need the nanny state coming in an gumming up the works under the illusion that they are protecting me. All the increased bonding will do is increase costs to the broker, causing some to have to close operation, and those that are left are going to take that added cost out of any rate. So, as with most things, the person at the lowest rung of the ladder is the one who is actually paying for it. Be it the customer by being charged more, or the truck by being offered less. And when you limit the number of brokers and reduce competition among them, they can all conspire on the rates.

Beware of unintended consequences of government "coming to the rescue". The Government is not your friend.

 

more of a negative impact then positive.

ummmm. the black box does nothing to improve safety. i see it as more negative. god didn't design the human body to function around a box.

as far as progressive goes. they are a very slim company for truckers. last i checked it was only availalble in 4 states. they coudln't give me a quote since i live in utah. all tha advertising and they can't even sell it in most states. what a waste of advertising money.

 

cow pie1, there is really nothing to stop someone from being taken. but having the bond HELPS recover or provides incentive for the broker to pay his accounts.

peformance bonds are standard in many industries, construction for example. in many states a contractor is required to have a posted with the state, if his performance fails the consumer can file against his bond to get the work done right. in sc this also applies to mobile home installers also, their system works very well. if you dont do your job, you get shut down.

many may not understand how a performance bond works, first of all you have to meet certain criteria to get bonded, there are credit standards, ability to pay, job ability standards etc. the higher the bond the higher the standard.

then once a bond is in place, lets say a truck broker with a bond, if the bond is filed against and the claim is found valid, the bonding company pays the claim.

THEN, they go after the trucker broker with the bond to recover their money. the broker isnt off the hook after the claim is paid, only then he is liable to the bonding company, and they dont mess around, they have the resources to get their money.


that is how a higher bond helps anyone owed money from someone who is bonded. now if a guy is on the hook with a 10,000 dollar bond and doesnt pay a bunch of folks, the most he stands to be on the hook for is 10 grand. if ya owe folks a hundred thousand and dont pay, you only pay the bond company 10,000 dollars. you got 90,000 left.

now say you have a performance bond of 100,000 dollars, that puts more pressure on a broker to pay and perform better. and then imagine a 500,000 dollar bond, then you talked about houses, property , cars etc than can be seized from the unscrupulous broker.

it gives them far more incentive to perform, which is what a performance bond is supposed to do.

in my past as a contractor, modular home installer, modular and mobile home transporter, i carried 250,000 performance bond and 5 mil in general liability. it caused me no great financial pain to acquire that.

i know first hand in the states that require contractors to be bonded, insured and licensed the jobs paid more. i also filed on general contractors bonds 4 times and i always got my money. it took some time and some effort, but i collected. if not for a bond i would have been left with nothing.



frankly a 10,000 dollar performance bond is useless, there might as not be one at that rate. pay a couple hundred bucks for a bond and boom, a few hundred for abrokers license and boom youre a broker.


and as far as the eobr issue, the problem i have is something else i have to pay for. and it isnt foolproof, those computer logs can be changed at the office, the driver cant edit line 3 but the office can.

the eobr cannot ensure which driver is behind the wheel etc etc. it only notes when the truck is moving. or when it has moved.

the simplest , cheapest solution is to simply enforce whats already on the books. and they perhaps should also check trucks with eobr at the scales to see how many are not connected to the brainbox, dont have the driver logged in, etc. everyone seems to think there are the end all be all.

i had a discussion with several drivers on a dedicated account a while back and when eobr came up they said it caused them no problems, they simply unscrewed the connecter, went where they needed, reconnected and it was taken care of.

 

I guess I am wary of any government stepping in. Not that it might not be the best option, but it must be viewed with suspicion. There are some who view the government as the cure all for everything. We have gotten to the point where there are so many laws and regulations that even the government can't keep track of them all. And very few of them actually have the effect that was desired.

EOBR mandates should be viewed with suspicion and adopted in only a limited case to actually solve a problem that exists. A blanket mandate does absolutely nothing to enhance safety. It only places but one more tool to maybe prosecute a person or carrier for violating other regulations, but nothing to actually stop behavior. But of note, there is nothing that can be done legally on paper that cannot be done legally with an EOBR, including using the truck for personal use without having to use any time either on duty or driving. The regulations are adhered to with either method. And neither will stop an individual from doing an "end run" around the regulations. I use an EOBR and like it for reducing my workload keeping track of paper, less time filling out paper, and a solid record of location and compliance for any legal issues, whether they be regulatory or civil.

Increasing broker bonding requirements have a similar effect. They increase the statutory requirements for a potential broker to operate, and it may cause some scrutiny by those that provide bonding insurance in their criteria, but it does not in any way prevent lousy human behavior, nor does it guarantee that the offended party will recover any compensation for which the bonding was supposed to protect. Especially after all the legal wrangling that must occur in these situations. It only gives the appearance of enforcing contract compliance and gives some "warm fuzzy feelings" that any perceived problem is being addressed and solved.

I would rather that there be a statutory requirement that all shipping fees be prepaid, and mandated placed in escrow thru a third party, say a financial institution, then be paid out accordingly at the completion of the hauling contract. This can be part of the broker requirement. Then the real problem is addressed.... that of the shipper not paying in a timely manner as they should, and that of the broker not having the funds in place to fulfill the hauling contract at the completion of the shipment. That is a more secure situation and paper trail that can be traced and prosecuted. And with a third entity providing the security of the funds involved in the transaction. Any regulatory mandate for increased broker bonding does not even come close to addressing the real concern that is the problem... the fulfillment of shipping contract. The method I described provides more security for both shippers and the transporting entity than any increased broker bonding could ever hope to provide. And then, the broker would actually be a broker, and not involved in the risks associated with actual money transfer. Even the broker would be in a better situation. All parties would have their interests protected with a lower cost to maintain compliance compared to increased broker bonding fees and requirements.

 

the monetary cost to a broker to increase his bond is minor compared to the machine to put into place prepaid shipper bills, and then placing it in escrow, etc. there would no doubt be fees to be charged at each step of that process.


but irregardless of what organization one may belong to, or whether you dont belong, you have to be proactive, take action in some form.

 

I had ooida til I drove for a crappy company.they had worked on the trl a week before I got it.Back axle lost its tires and a brakes on the highway.called ooida and told them the story and they called the company and asked them why the was keeping 2500 of my money.The company told them I was responsible for the wheels falling off even though DOT said that the lugs was sheared off due to someone over tightening them.I cancelled my membership that day

 

I've got some insurance with them, the membership is cheap enough . And the grief they cause mega carriers and guberment is priceless .

 

i guess that would depend on the contract you had signed with this company, did you have ooida check the contract before you signed?

or just had them call after? was this settlement money or an escrow account. so since when ooida called , and they wouldnt pay, you cancelled membership. did you then sue the company over the 2500 or did you let it drop after you expected ooida to do it for you.

i swear, what some folks expect for 45 dollars a year or 25 if you join. i enjoy the magazine if nothing else.

be realistic

i got to tell you , i have never expected ooida to collect any money for me. i have called for advice , or to see if some others had the same problem, but i never expected thm to be my collection agent for 45 dollars a year.

 

With all the info available on the internet paying $45 a year for a magazine and questionable advice is insane .
By the time a magazine is published you are reading history , not current events. You get better advice here for free .

 

Are you serious?

You obviously are not a driver. You must of crawled out from under some rock.....