Where are all the reformers?

Where are today's Osborn Elliotts, Ida Wells,WalterWinchells,Edward R.Murrows and the Hamills and Breslins?


Jon Stewart? Lol; no killer instinct. If you are nice and wimpy enough to emcee the Oscars you cannot be a down and dirty journalistic crusdader.. You have to have a big set of you know whats and in today's soccer mom society those appendages are almost extinct.


I have sent the link to this blog to Rachel Maddow, and plan to send it to Matthews and Keith Olbermann


The three of them worry more about ratings than exposes. Maddow's hairdo is the most serious act of non conformity she has carried out so far but she does at least show some promise.Since one of the worst offenders,North American Van Lines runs commercials on her show there is zero chance she will attack them.
Matthews is still talking about Tip O'Neill from another Century.


The riskiest action ever taken by Keith Olbermann was to post a windbag blog on the Daily Kos (which sold out to Corporate America years ago).The Kosmeister himself kicked me off the site during the past campaign for disagreeing with one of his posts.


What about the bloggers all over the web?. Aren't they crusaders for unpopular causes? An easy way to test their sincerity is to note if they have advertisements on their blogs. If they do, you know they will not step over certain lines.


A true crusader would pick up the blog you are reading right now (the Trivialization of Brutal Crimes) and run with it. I've already done the dirty work;all they have to do is use their influence to get into the inner workings of DOT and expose the resons why DOT allows the domestic terrorism of Highway Hijacking to grow and flourish.


It's not about budgetary considerations.DOT has billions they use to print flyers to stuff in the Post Offices literature pamphlet trays! Billions to have robots sit around and invent acronyms for inefficient ,incomprehensible programs like (SAFETEA-LU)


Guess what those 9 letters stand for?

Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users
A baboon could think up a better name than that.


So who is going to carry forth the crusade required to put the fear of arrest and imprisonment into the DOT regulations?


Me? I am 78 and live on $15,000 a year. I have the education (Rutgers 56,BA,Journalism) and experience to do it. Do I have the energy? Doutbful!
And while I can be quite altruistic when I am as angry as I am now, I will defer if someone younger comes forth and takes over the reins.

So all I can do is continue my own digging here until some hit men come after me.

The question is who will send them? The Feds or the Moving company criminals?

DOT'S INITIATIVE TO CONTROL HOUSEHOLD GOODS BROKERS

A PROGRESS REPORT ON A 2003 INITITIATIVE WHEREBY DOT WOULD
EMPLOY NEW NEW METHODS TO WEED OUT UNSCRUPULOUS HOUSEHOLD GOODS BROKERS

Popular Title: Household Goods Brokers
RIN 2126-AA84
Stage: Undetermined

Previous Stage: ANPRM: Publication Date 12/22/2004; End of Comment Period 02/22/2005. NPRM: Publication date 2/8/2007; End of Comment Period 5/9/2007
Abstract: This rulemaking would address the American Moving and Storage Association´s petition for rulemaking and implement certain provisions of Subtitle B of SAFETEA-LU. FMCSA would determine in this rulemaking whether 49 CFR part 371 needs to be amended to protect consumers against unscrupulous brokers of household goods.
Effects:
Information Collection


Prompting action: Statute
Legal Deadline: Final Rule : 08/10/2006


Rulemaking Project Initiated: 05/12/2003
Docket Number: FMCSA-2004-17008

Report on DOT Significant Rulemakings


This Report provides a summary and the status for all significant rulemakings that DOT currently has pending or has issued recently. We update the Report at the beginning of each month. The information in the Report is not intended to commit DOT to specific conclusions or actions. For example, after further analysis, DOT may decide the effects of the rule would be different or it may decide to terminate the rulemaking.

Access Reports - May 2009 Report (1514 KB)

Explanation for any delay: Additional coordination necessary
Federal Register Citation for Undetermined: None

SOME BACKGROUND FROM YOUR BLOGMEISTER ON HOUSEHOLD GOODS "BROKERS"

WHAT IS A BROKER AND WHY DO i NEED A BROKER WHEN MOVING?

When I sent out for bids on my move from Melbourne,Florida to Longs,SC in early March,2009 I sent my request to 5 licensed moving companies all of whom had BBB logos on their Website Mastheads.

Instead of 5 bids I received back over 50 quotes, 45 of course from companies I never had contacted. I did some surfing and googling and found out that 45 "companies" who I did not contact but who sent me quotes were, in fact not Moving Companies at all but "Brokers" who arranged moves for consumers as middlemen and walked away with a piece of the pie.

Why not? ;, in a crooked, unpoliced, industry filled with licensed Highway Hijackers there is always room for more criminal swindlers. These crafty brokers called me from their homes all times of the day and night,much as bill collectors might do but these con men were collecting my personal posessions to sell on the open market!

I of course was not born yesterday (6/15/31) so I told them all to go to a netherworld location.

So that's what a "broker" is and DOT, after possibly a billion complainst about them issued a report in 2003 that they were aware of these brokers and how unscrupulous "some" of them were so they were about to start a system of dealing with them or deterring them ( I guess similar to how they have dealt with and deterred the thousands of licensed criminal movers under their jurisdiction.

Well that initiative is now 6 years old and just 3 weeks ago on May 1,2009 DOT felt that the public deserved a "PROGRESS REPORT" on thier undertaking.

Guess what? There has been no progress! Reason given? They are still collecting information. So,DOT ,if nothing else, is consistent. They have an "Enforcement and Compliance Dept" which cannot arrest and/or imprison criminals and they issue progress reports when there is no progress to report!

This would be funny if it wasn't so tragic!

If you are a "live" victim of Highway Hijacking (Live:meaning your moves are currently still being held by your mover) Please do not believe I am being flip. I am trying here on an almost daily basis to alert thousands of other consumers who will become victims in the new few weeks.

A DOT which cannot move in with a SWAT TEAM and arrest Highway Highjackers while they are holding your goods hostage and demanding ransom from you is a disgrace to this country and the media and/or other Government Watchdogs need to expose them.

Obama: New Supreme Court Nominee must have EMPATHY!

If you are new to this blog and wonder why more isn't being done about the problem addressed here on a daily basis, please go back into the archives and read or reread the blog of May 5,2009 titled:
Trivialization v Empathy

Empathy is in the news this week because on Tuesday the President is expected to announce his choice to be the new Supreme Court Justice.

Those who trivialize the crime of Highway Hijacking lack the empathy DNA gene and usually are too sated by their material successes to feel the pain of those who suffer needless pain because of an inept DOT.

Possibly the focus this week on this characteristic in such an important public figure will give them pause for thought.

OVERSIGHT OR ARRESTS?

WHICH IS THE GREATER DETERRENT AGAINST HIGHWAY HIJACKERS?


The Department of Transportation (DOT) inherited the oversight of the moving industry as a result of the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) Termination Act of 1995 (the Act). Until the enactment of this law sunsetting the Commission, the ICC issued and enforced consumer protection regulations.The 1995 Termination Act encouraged consumers to resolve household goods disputes through arbitration or by bringing a civil action in a court of appropriate jurisdiction.

In essence, the ICC Termination Act ended the Federal government's role in resolving household goods disputes.

In August 2005, the enactment of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) further required DOT to make data available to the public so that they could make better consumer choices.

In addition to consumer outreach and education, DOT emphasized that enforcement is a key tool in eliminating unscrupulous movers from the moving industry.

This is important and I quote from DOT's own website:

"As required by SAFETEA-LU, FMCSA has been working with Federal, State, and local household goods enforcement agencies to better coordinate investigations, to optimize our resources, and to achieve the most effective enforcement results."

Now when DOT praises its own "enforcement" record it is not referring to "enforcement" as a typical layman or more importantly as a victim of Highway Hijacking might understand that term. Enforcement to DOT, is a term used to measure the amount of "reviews" against movers and claims and fines levied against movers.

So,to simplify the meaning of this vague, discombobulated jargon used by Govt
Agencies,one might compare it to the reporting of crimes in a typical town,village or county in a U.S. state. Take for example the statistics on the crime of rape in one of these cities.

Let's say a medium size town claims they have stepped up "enforcement" by investigating more rape cases and bringing more "civil suits" against perpetrators.

Does that make a woman feel more secure when they walk down a dark street at night?

Of course not.

Investigations of Household Goods movers and bringing more civil claims or arbitrations, by the same token does not make a consumer feel any more confidence in choosing and contracting with a mover for their planned Interstate move.

DOT is playing games with the term "enforcement" and they know it!

Enforcement, without arrests during the commission of a crime is just so much bureaucratic HOGWASH.

CONNECTING THE..... D O T S...... PART 2

D..O..T..S.. in this case refers to the Uinted States Department of Transportation.

This blog has been in existance for a month and has explored so many avenues of possible help or probable obstruction of help to victims of HIHWAY HIJACKING.

From the hopelessly ineffectual BBB to the pathetic non-effort of local police departments to the futile ASMA and the individual victims themselves calling the criminals who are holding their goods hostage while demanding ransom payments.

After all these fruitless efforts and the hundreds of e mails and phone call I have received from other victims like myself I have concluded the chief culprit,by far, in this shocking broad daylight hijacking is:

THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION.

Read through the testimony they gave to congressional investigating committees as published in yesterdays blog Connecting th Dots.

They spent weeks patting themselves on the back for all the new subcommittees they formed and the "strike Forces" they employed to make the household goods movers more compliant.

The result is that 4 years after the hearings the problem is now an epidemic and your chance of getting through an interstate move today without being hijacked and extorted are much less than 30%. iT DOESN'T MATTER WHICH CARRIER YOU CHOOSE,HOW YOU RESEARCH THEM, GOOGLE THEM, YAHOO THEM, CALL AND SEEK REASSURANCE FROM THEM BEFORE AND AFTER OR DURING THE MOVE,CALL THE POLICE, THE FBI,THE STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL, YOUR LOCAL REP IN D.C.,.

WHY???

I am going to tell you why so listen carefully:

Because HIGHWAY HIJACKING is probably the only crime where you cannot have the criminal arrested during the actual commission of the crime. period,dot,comma,question mark and ad infinitum.

IT IS A SIMPLE AS THAT.

If you plan a move a month from today from Point A TO Point B 500 miles away in another state and you make up your mind you will not be a victim you are fooling yourself.

Lets say PODUNK MOVING CO picks up all your furniture,appliances and personal goods at Point A and agrees to deliver them to Point B 3 TO 4 days later. sounds reasonable doesn't it? Surely a mover that is licensed and registered by and with the trusted folks at DOT, respected member of BBB and ASMA can travel 500 miles in 3 to 4 days and deliver your goods,right?

WRONG!

They will pick up your goods at Point A without a problem , put your goods in a warehouse, call you three weeks later and ask for RANSOM to free your goods they are holding hostage.

In the meantime you call the Govt Agency which licensed and registered them and what do you get?

You get referred to hundreds of sites,agencies and "STRIKE FORCES" that DOT has spent billions of Taxpayer's dollars so as to deal with a catastrophic situation like this. And just like the agencies that responded to the victims of Katrina in New Orleans they won't even drop you some water from a chopper.

Go back and read the testimony (published in yesterday's blog) that DOT gave to Congress as to how successful they have been in bringing Movers into compliance with regulations.They fined 40 movers in 2006, 40 out of thousands who routinely engage in hostage taking.

The ONLY enforcement DOT actually does is to enforce arbitration by the perpetrators "AFTER THE FACT",i.de. after the crime has run its course and your goods are delivered anywhere from one month to 6 months later.

Ask yourself. You are having coffee and notice through the storefront window someone breaking into your auto and driving away with it. You run outside,call a cop you see directing traffic, and scream to him that your car has just been stolen. Instead of that cop radioing ahead to his fellow policemen, he comes over and hands you a leaflet with agencies who will help you arbitrate with the car thief after you find your car?

Or even more graphic, you are mugged as a cop looks on and he says "don't worry, I will testify in court on your behalf that you have been victimized"

Sounds ludicrous but in effect that is what happens when a Highway Hijacking takes place.

I will pick up on this thread in detail in the days ahead.

CONNECTING THE ,,,,,,,,, D.O.T.S...........

In my previous blog 2 days ago I promised to publish in my next post the complete text of the two page letter mailed to me on 5/7/09 by a member of the FMCSA, office of Compliance @ Enforcement Dept. of DOT.

Because this was a scanned Federal Government Document I am prohibited from publishing it.

However I am able to post instead, the complete text of very important testimony given by the then Acting Administrator of the FFMCSA, Warren Hoemann before a US Senate Committee in 2006.

This testimony touches on every aspect of the Highway Hijacking being perpetrated by "rouge household good carriers".

The text is very long and laborious. However, if you are a victim or a friend or relative of someone planning an interstate move this effort will be well worth your effort.

Tomorrow I will comment on this testimony because the scope of the problem discussed by the experts in 2006 has been magnified at least ten-fold since then.Until our current leaders,especially those in the Department of Transportation realize this, nothing will change.

STATEMENT OF WARREN HOEMANN
ACTING ADMINISTRATOR OF THE
FEDERAL MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY ADMINISTRATION
BEFORE THE
SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
SUBCOMMITTEE ON SURFACE TRANSPORTATION AND MERCHANT MARINE
May 4, 2006

INTRODUCTION

Chairman Lott, Ranking Member Inouye, and Senators of the Subcommittee, thank you for inviting me today to discuss the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration's (FMCSA) oversight role in household goods transportation. I am pleased to appear before you to describe FMCSA outreach, education, enforcement, and compliance programs that help consumers protect themselves during a move and help to remove unscrupulous movers from the household goods industry.

Mr. Chairman, a household move can be a stressful undertaking, as many of us in this room know firsthand. An estimated 40 million Americans relocate each year, approximately 1.6 million of which are interstate moves, handled by approximately 4,000 companies. Fortunately, the majority of household moves are completed without incident. Consumers in these moves are well served by registered, legitimate, safe, and trustworthy household goods carriers. However, there exists a small group of unscrupulous and dishonest movers that gives the entire moving industry a bad name. These "rogue movers" prey upon distraught consumers by agreeing to haul their goods and then holding their possessions hostage for exorbitant and unexpected fees. Some of these movers never return the goods to the consumer, selling them instead and pocketing the proceeds.

In addition to the moving companies, FMCSA focuses its attention on those household goods brokers who conduct dishonest business practices. Brokers are persons who act as a go-between, arranging household goods moves between a customer and a carrier. Dishonest brokers engage in deceptive practices via the Internet. For example, a dishonest broker may request an initial deposit for a move from the shipper and then never arrange for the move. In the same instances, the shipper cannot locate the broker because the broker does not have a physical address listed or has moved and/or closed. It is these types of movers and brokers that we seek to eliminate from the legitimate marketplace.

BACKGROUND

The Department of Transportation (DOT) inherited the oversight of the moving industry as a result of the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) Termination Act of 1995 (the Act). Until the enactment of this law sunsetting the Commission, the ICC issued and enforced consumer protection regulations to ensure consumers arranging an interstate move received basic information on tariffs, estimating requirements, weighing practices, insurance coverage, and requirements for delivery. DOT's inherited authority included jurisdiction over household goods carriers and brokers to protect consumers on interstate moves by defining the rights and responsibilities of consumers and household goods carriers and brokers. The Act required motor carriers who transport household goods for-hire in interstate commerce and brokers who arrange the interstate transportation of household goods to comply with Federal commercial regulations.

Among the functions transferred to FMCSA were the registration of for-hire household goods carriers and brokers and the monitoring of compliance with the financial responsibility requirements. In transferring these commercial regulations to DOT, Congress directed the discontinuation of the ICC's dispute resolution functions. Although the ICC did not have the authority to resolve disputes involving loss or damage, it assisted consumers by contacting carriers to encourage timely claims handling. The Act instead encouraged consumers to resolve household goods disputes through arbitration or by bringing a civil action in a court of appropriate jurisdiction. These are the primary means by which consumers can resolve loss and damage claims. The Act did not give the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), FMCSA's predecessor agency, jurisdiction over dispute settlement. Should consumers elect not to use binding arbitration, they can take the carrier to court. Additionally, the Act established a private right of action for a shipper to recover damages for carrier violations of the commercial regulations. In essence, the ICC Termination Act ended the Federal government's role in resolving household goods disputes.

It is important to mention that FMCSA has oversight only over interstate moves. Even then, FMCSA does not have jurisdiction over all of these moves. FMCSA's consumer protection regulations apply only to agreements between motor carriers and individual shippers. They do not apply to household goods shipments moved under the terms and conditions of a government bill of lading, which includes military moves, or so-called national account shipments where a company arranges to move its employees.

Until 2001, FMCSA and FHWA addressed household goods complaints with a small number of specialists who handled a broad range of household goods and regulatory matters. These specialists investigated consumer complaints through contact with carriers to resolve instances of alleged noncompliance. As the result of a Government Accountability Office (GAO) audit in 2001, which identified a need to centralize household goods complaint data, FMCSA expanded its program to centrally collect complaint data. In August 2005, the enactment of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) further required us to make that data available to the public so that they can make better consumer choices by August 2006. We are now developing the prototype of the database and expect to meet this statutory deadline.

SAFETEA-LU made other important changes affecting FMCSA's oversight of household goods transportation. In order to address these new responsibilities, FMCSA has developed a two-pronged approach. The first is an enhanced outreach program to better educate consumers and the second is an aggressive program to take enforcement actions against non-compliant movers in the industry. I would like to describe each briefly.

CONSUMER OUTREACH

A well-informed consumer is the best defense against the rogue mover. Federal and State actions after the fact cannot recompense injured consumers. In 2004, FMCSA's Safety Violation and Household Goods Consumer Complaint Hotline at 1-888-DOT-SAFT (1-888-368-7238) received an increased volume of household goods consumer calls, which suggested a critical need for a more effective outreach and education program. In response to this need, FMCSA developed a Consumer Information Program to provide consumers with information to protect themselves against dishonest and rogue movers. FMCSA relies on public and private organizations, as well as the moving industry, to increase consumer awareness of the moving process thereby enabling the consumer to make a safe and successful move.

In FY 2005, Congress provided $1.5 million to FMCSA to develop outreach initiatives to help educate the general public. We used these funds to develop an outreach and education strategy, conducted market research of the moving industry, and developed a communications plan for deployment. During FY 2006, Congress provided $1 million for household goods outreach and education initiatives. FMCSA will spend these funds to develop new outreach materials in English and Spanish, enhance our Protect Your Move Web site to focus on Internet moving fraud, and evaluate our household goods consumer information program to determine future enforcement and outreach initiatives.

For example, in February 2005, FMCSA established a national Household Goods Partnership comprised of two Federal agencies, the U.S. Postal Service and the Federal Maritime Commission, State law enforcement agencies, consumer protection groups, and several moving industry associations. The DOT Office of the Inspector General (OIG) is also a partner. The group coordinates efforts to address moving fraud. Additionally, the partnership has helped FMCSA launch a consumer education campaign on how to have a successful move and avoid falling victim to rogue movers. This campaign is called "Protect Your Memories. Your Money. Your Move."

Following up on the partnership, in April 2005, FMCSA developed a new Moving Fraud Prevention Web site to assist consumers (www.protectyourmove.gov) that provides guidance and best practices to help people avoid being taken advantage of, or worse, getting caught in a scam by a rogue mover or broker. The site provides a list of federally registered and insured movers and brokers. It provides details about household goods regulations governing professional moving companies, information about how to file a complaint in the event of a problem, and moving tips on how to have a successful move. Additionally, the Web site also serves as a resource for members of the Household Goods Partnership by providing an online campaign toolbox for conducting a "Consumer Education Campaign to Reduce Moving Fraud." The Web site also provides links to local Better Business Bureaus, consumer protection agencies, State Attorneys General, and moving associations. Since its activation, the Web site has had more than 2.2 million hits.

A recent enhancement to our outreach efforts is an awareness campaign through the Postal Service. We will soon distribute approximately 11 million leaflets in its Mover's Guides to regions in the United States that have the highest concentration of household goods complaints (i.e., California, Florida, New Jersey, and New York). Also through our partnership with the Postal Service, we expect to reach roughly 1.8 million registrants via its online Change of Address service, which provides an online move planning service for household goods consumers.

Another way we have broadened our distribution of household goods outreach brochures to the general public is through a cooperative agreement with the U.S. General Services Administration's (GSA) Federal Citizen Information Center. To date, GSA has distributed over 43,000 copies of the Ready to Move - Tips for a Successful Interstate Move brochure. FMCSA sent copies of this brochure to all registered household goods brokers to provide to their customers, and placed it on our Protect Your Move Web site. In addition, we distributed over 50,000 of the brochures to our field offices, State governments, and Partnership members for dissemination to the general public in their area.

To continue to educate consumers, we recently updated our pamphlet, Your Rights and Responsibilities When You Move, for the moving industry to provide to its customers, as required by SAFETEA-LU. We will distribute copies to our field offices and State offices. The updated pamphlet can be downloaded from our Web site distribution. We published a Federal Register Notice on April 7, 2006, revising the pamphlet to incorporate the SAFETEA-LU changes. As part of our outreach efforts, FMCSA provided over 443,000 Protect Your Move brochures and posters to our field offices, State governments, and Partnership members for dissemination to the general public in their area.

It is the Agency's plan to continue to work with our partners to develop outreach initiatives and educate consumers about the moving industry and its business practices. In addition to consumer outreach and education, enforcement is a key tool in eliminating unscrupulous movers from the moving industry.

ENFORCEMENT

FMCSA has increased its enforcement efforts in order to protect the American public from illegal activities and deceitful business practices by rogue moving companies. In 2005, we received almost 3,000 household goods complaints, which included 622 calls on hostage freight situations, 575 on unauthorized operations, and 2,281 on pick-up and delivery complaints. A good portion of the calls, 1,644, pertained to lost and damaged goods. As mentioned earlier in this statement, FMCSA does not have jurisdiction to resolve disputed loss and damage claims. Mr. Chairman, as we increase our outreach and enforcement efforts in this area, we expect that complaints will increase initially from these current levels - a good indicator that we are reaching consumers and educating them on ways to ensure a successful move. Once consumers become more aware of the issues and pitfalls to avoid, we anticipate complaints will decrease.

FMCSA enforcement staff continually monitors the geographic areas containing movers who are subject to the highest volume of complaints. FMCSA then conducts enforcement "strike forces" in these areas. The largest volume of complaints involve movers and brokers located in the States of California, Florida, New Jersey, and New York, followed closely by the States of Georgia, Illinois, and Texas.

In FY 2005, FMCSA conducted strike forces in California and Florida, and combined strike forces in New Jersey and New York, and Illinois and Texas. These activities were conducted with the assistance of various State entities, including the Florida Department of Agriculture, the Texas Department of Public Service, and the New York DOT. These four strike forces produced approximately 100 household goods compliance reviews and 20 enforcement cases, which are civil actions brought by FMCSA against the carrier or broker.

This fiscal year, FMCSA has conducted two of its four planned strike force activities - the first of which was in Colorado. After receiving numerous complaints at our Colorado Division office, our enforcement staff worked closely with the Colorado Public Utilities Commission to conduct this strike force. Of the 16 companies identified for the strike force, all resulted in household goods compliance reviews, which produced 3 enforcement cases. This successful action substantially reduced the volume of household goods complaints received by FMCSA's Colorado Division.

During the second strike force activity in FY 2006, FMCSA focused its efforts in Florida. Additionally, these household goods compliance reviews, based on the number of consumer complaints, were also conducted in Georgia and Texas. A total of 47 household goods compliance reviews were conducted, which resulted in 11 enforcement cases to date. In Florida, we also discovered approximately 30 household goods carriers and brokers that were no longer in business.

Household Goods Compliance Reviews

FMCSA has increased its performance of household goods compliance reviews since 2001. In FY 2001, a total of 13 household goods compliance reviews were conducted. This steadily increased to 20 in FY 2002, 30 in FY 2003, to 52 in FY 2004. FMCSA's goal for household goods compliance reviews in FY 2005 was 300, which included our strike force activities. We exceeded our goal with a total of 381 household goods compliance reviews. FMCSA's goal in FY 2006, which also includes strike force activities, is 450 household goods compliance reviews, a goal we are pursuing aggressively.

Currently, household goods compliance reviews are conducted based on complaint data that is captured in FMCSA's National Commercial Complaint Database. This information is analyzed on a regular basis to determine priorities for conducting reviews on household goods carriers and brokers. When a complaint is received, it is reviewed for substance and the database checked to determine if a pattern of complaints alleging noncompliance exists. If a pattern is identified based on complaints and geographic location, we conduct a household goods compliance review on the operations of these carriers or brokers to determine compliance with FMCSA regulations.

When a compliance review discloses violations of agency regulations, FMCSA's Enforcement team initiates action to assess civil penalties for the violations. Through all of these efforts, FMCSA has been able to increase its compliance and enforcement actions.

Total Number of Household Goods
Compliance Enforcement Cases

FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005
6 12 3 11 43

SAFETEA-LU PROVISIONS

As a result of SAFETEA-LU's enactment in August 2005, FMCSA was given increased mandates in many areas of household goods enforcement. Household goods carriers are required to offer arbitration to shippers and the level at which binding arbitration is required was increased from $5,000 to $10,000 under SAFETEA-LU. For claims in excess of $10,000, the carrier must agree to arbitration for the shipper to be able to have the claim arbitrated. Additionally, the arbitration requirements, which were previously limited to disputes over loss and damage, have been expanded to include disputes over payment of additional delivery charges.

Section 4206 of SAFETEA-LU enabled State Attorneys General and other State enforcement officials to enforce Federal household goods regulations through civil action against a carrier or broker in U.S. District Court. The FY 2006 Transportation, Treasury, Housing and Urban Development, the Judiciary, the District of Columbia, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act placed limitations on State enforcement authority by permitting States to pursue civil actions only against carriers and brokers who meet specific statutory criteria. This limitation sunsets on September 30, 2006. To our knowledge, no State has pursued civil action on behalf of consumers based on the authority granted by SAFETEA-LU.

As required by SAFETEA-LU, FMCSA has been working with Federal, State, and local household goods enforcement agencies to better coordinate investigations, to optimize our resources, and to achieve the most effective enforcement results. As a result of these efforts, FMCSA has established a working group to assist the States with bringing their own civil actions on behalf of consumers against household goods carriers or brokers. Comprised of representatives from the DOT OIG, the National Association of Attorneys General and various State Attorneys General and U.S. District Attorneys, the Florida Department of Agriculture, and the Maryland Office of Consumer Affairs, the group has opened a dialogue to develop practices and procedures to enhance the Federal/State partnership and make legislative and regulatory recommendations concerning these efforts. This group differs from the Household Goods Partnership in that this working group is designed to assist the States with bringing their own civil actions on behalf of consumers against household goods carriers or brokers.

Other sections of SAFETEA-LU worth noting are:

Established the minimum penalty at $10,000 per violation for carriers holding a shipper's goods hostage after they have received payment necessary to effect delivery under the law. This should be an effective deterrent against carriers who hold consumers' belongings hostage.
Increased the minimum penalty for operating without registration to $25,000. This increase should dissuade the rogue carrier or broker from attempting to fly below the FMCSA radar.
Added requirements to the registration process will permit FMCSA to better track carriers and brokers and may help in identifying companies who go out of business and try to return under a new name to avoid FMCSA regulations and penalties.
FMCSA has implemented six of the household goods sections of SAFETEA-LU by policy issuances. These policy documents were recently distributed to our field offices and provide operational guidance on how to apply these new requirements. They include definitions, household goods carrier operations, liability of carriers under receipts and bills of lading, arbitration requirements, civil penalties relating to brokers and unauthorized transportation, and penalties for holding goods hostage. FMCSA is working on a notice of proposed rulemaking for a new household goods broker consumer protection rule that it hopes to publish in the Federal Register in the near future. This rule implements SAFETEA-LU Section 4212 requirements applicable to the household goods broker industry and enhances FMCSA's enforcement tools with regard to that industry. FMCSA is in the process of completing other rulemakings to codify the remainder of the SAFETEA-LU sections into law.

BUDGETARY RESOURCES

In 2000, FMCSA had three employees working on household goods. Currently, there are twelve total household goods staff - four full-time program and support staff at FMCSA headquarters and eight full-time investigators in the field devoted to household goods reviews. During FY 2005 and 2006, FMCSA trained 75 Safety Investigators to assist in handling household goods investigations. It is important to note that household goods compliance reviews are not the main function of FMCSA Safety Investigators - it is ancillary to their core safety mission. Currently, we are able to meet our internal goal of household goods reviews.

CONCLUSION

Mr. Chairman, household goods fraud potentially affects consumers across the nation. The goal of eliminating disreputable companies from the moving business is one we all share. As I mentioned in this testimony, our consumer outreach programs increase both the visibility of the problem and the awareness of warning signs of a disreputable mover. We will continue to develop outreach and education strategies with our household goods partners to help consumers have successful moves. Our enforcement and compliance program has yielded tangible results, as evident by rogue carriers leaving the industry or coming into compliance and now operating legitimate businesses. As we have shown through our strike force activities, cooperation among all branches and levels of government is the surest way to eliminate this threat to the American home.




Related Links
Download PDF Version
"Protect Your Move" Web Site
Household Goods Sections of SAFETEA-LU
Testimony Archive

?
?

Feedback | Privacy Policy | USA.gov | Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) | Accessibility
OIG Hotline | Web Policies and Important Links | Site Map | Plug-ins

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590 ? 1-800-832-5660 ? TTY: 1-800-877-8339
Field Office Phone List





Feedback | Privacy Policy | FirstGov.gov | Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) | Accessibility
Web Policies and Important Links | Site Map | Plug-ins

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
400 7th Street SW, Washington, DC 20590 • 1-800-832-5660 • TTY: 1-800-877-8339

THE CORE OF THE PROBLEM !

Today this blog turns away from individual complaints against specific household goods moving companies and toward the core of the problem:

THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

specifically the

THE OFFICE OF COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCEMENT

of the FMSCA

Towards the end of my personal 30 day nightmare with HIGHWAY HIJACKING
I received a 2 page letter dated 5/7/2009 from a member of the above referenced office, John Van Steenburg, his reference no. 100034124.

I wish he had e mailed me this letter so I could present it here in it's entirety. I do not have a scanner and the letter is lengthy and repititive to the max.

I will try to give you the gist of this letter with some direct quotes and the rest by my paraphrasing:

"Thank you for your website complaint regarding MEGA MOVING AND STORAGE CORP.With your authorization we have notified the household goods carrier (mover) of your dissatisfaction with the service provided during your move,along with an explanation of its responsibilities to consumers under Federal regulations. We will ask company officials to respond directly to you."

Well, la de da, here I am, your blogmeister, at the time, three weeks without any of my personal possessions ,a victim of a hijacking with said goods still in the hands of the criminals who robbed them from me, and the enforcement department of the DOT of the most powerful nation on earth is telling the criminals to "respond directly to me" Note that he doesn't even tell said criminals to send him a copy of their response! In effect he has just notified me that he is washing his hands of the problem. The rest of his long letter refers me to various other agencies and offers arbitration procedures I might want to try to resolve the dispute. Here are some of his suggestions:

"Movers engaging in interstate transportation of household goods are required to conduct their operations in accordance with Federal regulations but FMCSA does not have the authority to intercede on behalf of shippers to recover their goods"


I repeat for emphasis, as this is the real core of the domestic terrorism being practiced every day by household goods movers in the form of HIGHWAY HIJACKING"

"Movers engaging in interstate transportation of household goods are required to conduct their operations in accordance with Federal regulations but FMCSA does not have the authority to intercede on behalf of shippers to recover their goods"

I will continue tomorrow with Mr.Steenburg's other suggestions and his office's efforts to identify and investigate complainst against carriers as I want to be fair and not take his remarks out of context. I will try to get to a fed ex store today to scan his letter into my PC so I can present it in it's entirety.

Suffice to say for now, the fact that none of the agencies, victims of HIGHWAY HIJACKING would logically seek out to recover their stolen goods, have enforcement powers... DOT,ASMA,BBB etc. The police do of course but they are reluctant, to say the least, to get involved in what they ,in my opinion, seem to feel are contractual disputes.

Hijacking is not a contractual dispute; it is a crime. The ineffectiveness of the U.S. Dept of Transportation, DOT is the core of the problem.