Would this be called a chameleon carrier?

Numerous tools......checking vehicle vin #s is clearly one, but there are "services" we subscribe to that take FMCSA information, as well as public information and cross check everything.....we find chameleons and related broker authorities using the service most often........funny enough we also use our own records of previous policyholders as well as previous SUBMISSIONS for insurance to catch chameleons

 

I'd recommend he lease onto a large carrier..
Roadrunner Transportation
Landstar

 

Depends a lot on the loss picture, we'd ask for the loss runs from the previous entity, so if he was trying to get away from a prior loss history it's still going to follow him. There is no "specific" chameleon rating factor we add....it's just when a chameleon is identified we have various factors we CAN add to increase the premium depending on how much the underwriter feels is needed to offset the increased loss potential.

We use a vendor with a complex program as a tool to find various associations between entities. But honestly some of the easiest associations to find chameleons with are with vital vin # reports......as well as driver reports showing on inspections.

As a carrier we get a monthly data dump from the FMCSA with all of the inspections conducted.....with our computers we can determine which inspected units are on one of our current OR previous policies......or if a unit was inspected under one of the authorities we cover and it's not currently scheduled.......THAT offense generally leads to cancellation.

Something we are really all over right now is getting after the "churners". You know the operator who doesn't drive, has a bunch of leased operators.......say 30 on Jan 1.......but with the turnover (why?, is he a "richard" or are his hiring practices suspect) that same 30 are not on the policy at 12/31.....and we have processed 84 endorsements during the year adding/deleting units/drivers.

 

Yes. Your friend could still run his company pretty much as he has in the past but billing, insurance, safety and other administrative tasks would be handled by the carrier.

 

I almost got burned in a similar situation. I was running two trucks, decided to take a company with 4 trucks under my MC. With the current rates headache was not worth it and I let them go after two months.
Because of that had a hard time renewing my insurance

 

Does this mean it would be more beneficial (in the eyes of insurance) for a single truck carrier looking to expand to buy their own second truck rather than hire an owner operator who could quit shortly thereafter?

 

Absolutely.......from an underwriting perspective the risk with power units owned by the named insured (or long term leased from Ryder etc), is a MUCH better "insurance risk" than the "paper" trucker churning through owner ops trying to figure out how to make his bottom line good for him.

 

Does this change if say I bought a 2nd truck but only ran truck 2 for say half the year and the other half kept it parked at home with fire and theft but no liability on it?