When you run your authority and deal with brokers, most have a clause about back soliciting their shippers. In other words, you are prohibited from soliciting a shipper that you have hauled for by a particular broker. If you haul for that shipper for a specified period of time, the broker is entitled to a percentage of your revenue from that shipper. Most seem to be about 12 months, some are longer. I spoke with one driver the other day who felt that this was a non issue and that any shipper was fair game, whether it is in a contract or not. I am curious as to whether most people feel the same way or not. Personally, I won't sign any agreement which I am not willing to comply. If I sign a back soliciting agreement and the broker fails to keep his part of the contract, the the shipper is then fair game. For instance, if the broker fails to pay as agreed, then the contract is void. I figure that as long as the broker keeps his end of the agreement then I should do the same.

 

Pretty simple answer to me, man gives his word then it's a done deal. If the other party renegs then after I tell him the deal is off

 

How would they even enforce this clause? Every broker I have hauled for had this clause. Most of these brokers double-broker anyway and no one seems to prove it. As competitive as this industry is it is all fair game. :lol:

 

I totally agree!! 90% of the loads I have seen are double brokered anyway and that is something that they ae not supposed to do either. There are exceptions to this, but for the most part it is all fair game.

tootie

 

Just another way to get your money, I would like see someone challenge
a contract like that in court. When I was in the finance business we were forever changing contracts to keep up with litigations . People were finding all sorts of things to get out of them . Had a top notch lawyer tell me there is no contract that wont be found faulty.
I looked at the Car arrive network and read their contract , they want to hold you to 24 months and will charge 10.00 per car .

 

You never know the relationship a shipper has with a broker. I recall one broker that I dealt with who had a relative who was over the shipping department where I picked up. Had I solicited this shipper then it would have been very easy for the broker to find out about it. Whether the broker attempts to collect on his contract or not may be another issue. You could lose out on a very good paying load by soliciting the brokers account. He would be foolish to send you to another shipper when he knows you may solicit their business for yourself. I know it may not be fashionable to keep your word, but when I give my word or sign a contract it means something. I can't do anything about what a broker or anyone else does, but I can control what I do. If you plan on back soliciting shippers, then why even sign a contract with a broker who has the back solicitation clause in his contract? If you want to get your own shippers, then perhaps you need to start knocking on doors. That is what the broker does. I never sign ANY contract with the idea of breaching it. There have been some contracts that I have refused to sign without modifications. I have lost some loads because I won't agree to some terms of a contract. To me that is the best way to handle it. For me, it is a matter of character. My word is my character. If I give my word and break it, then I have compromised my character. Most people who know me understand that I am a man of my word. I don't need a contract to keep my word. I don't even need a handshake. If I tell someone that I will do something then I will do everything possible to keep my word. When someone gives me their word or makes an agreement with me, then I expect them to honor their word. Whether the broker finds out about it is irrelevant. I know about it and that is what is most important to me. I spoke with a broker the other day who told me that I am old school. Perhaps so. It it makes me old school to keep my word, then I suppose that I am old school.

 

Gman,I am the same way. I was just curious as to how they would enforce such a clause. From what I heard some brokers don;t really care or enforce it while others do. I can see your point in a relative being in the shipping department. As for knocking on doors you have to wish me luck on finding one that opens. :lol:

 

Great post GMAN! Good way to run a business, good way to live your life.

 

This article was written by the President of VHI Transport a while back:

When our contract motor carrier began offering services directly to our shipper, we felt we needed, for the first time since 1977, to test the strength of our contract with a motor carrier in court. Although we have been harmed many times, there had never been such an open breach as this case.
Accordingly, we filed suit in Richmond Circuit Court this past September. The filing stipulated our contract and asked for an injunction to prohibit the carrier from doing business with our shipper customer. Through their legal counsel, the carrier offered a quick defense of an "open market concept." However, our attorney was somewhat surprised when the judge refused injunctive relief, but rather set the full case for trial on an expedited basis!

In preparing the case, we were confronted with some interesting questions: 1) In addition to an injunction, how much monetary damage should we ask for? Our contract did not stipulate a formula; 2) Should we, under state law, sue our shipper as well, particularly if we found he encouraged a tortuous interference. This required not only just a business decision but also more information about the case and handicapping the potential success of such an action.

Our potential court success became evident during depositions with the motor carrier's president. He acknowledged our contract and that he violated the contract with encouragement from our shipper. In fact, our shipper requested that the carrier provide them with copies of the rates we were paying the carrier and of our contract with him. As soon as the carrier's attorney heard the evidence, they encouraged the carrier to quickly settle with us, which we did. Accordingly, the order entered by the court in late November stipulated some of the following:

Enjoined them from doing any business except through Virginia Hiway, Inc.(VHI) with the shipper.

Enjoined them from using trade secrets belonging to VHI.

Allowed for monetary damages to be paid to VHI.

The TIA Board recently encouraged staff to contemplate a contract with carriers that would allow mediation and arbitration prior to court filings. Were this to have been in our contract language, as well as a proper venue for pursuing an action, the motor carrier would have saved thousands of dollars in penalties and we would have saved much in legal fees! I still dream of a day that Certified Brokers, along with qualified shippers and carriers might form a platform to bring quick remedy to areas like back solicitation, carrier cargo claim issues, and other such business behaviors that are best resolved by our industry.

 

Gosh, after rereading my post I feel like an idiot. I should have read each post fully. I too would and do honor anything I have ever signed.
I was reflecting on the issue of what tootie4 andDD60 wrote about double brokering. ops: