GIVE UP
- Thread starter chuckwagon
- Start date
nighttrain
Seasoned Expediter
oh no dont get him stared on about unions
chuckwagon
Seasoned Expediter
A few more points to those of you I seem unable to please or give a big enough kiss on the tail to:
highway star -
the so-called name calling from me started after THawk questioned my morals,ethics and content of my case. So if you are going to bite me a new one, sharpen your teeth on everyone else as well.
THawk -
I have gave you my side and at this point I really do not care if you dont think it adds up or not. I gave you the facts, I gave you the details and if it doesn't make up to you then it simply doesnt add up. You have made your judgement, in fact, I think you made your judgement before you even heard my side and no matter what the evidence was I could present to you.
Know to all others. Yes I am now on a mission I have never denied that. It is for several reasons. One, read the OOIDA history regarding their fight against the policy and practices of DAC. You would then see that even the OOIDA feels that the DAC report (which is supported by the American Trucking Association) has many holes and problems within their system. You would see that it is not just me that feels the DAC report is unfair, that it is open for individual comments and feelings entered by the carriers. I will be working through the OOIDA in the next several days to see what if any assistance they would be willing to provide. If you do the proper research you will see that several lower courts have questioned the ethics and practices of DAC - even though that same court failed to require DAC to make any specific changes, only taking proposed changes from DAC as any needed changes.
A new driver reporting agency will be developed within the next few months to allow drivers to report infractions, violations, etc in regards to carriers. It is my believe this is a much overdue tool for drivers to see when considering a move to a carrier. The site will not be supported by ads from carriers but other 'outside' companies, perhaps insurance companies, truck manufacturers, truck dealers, etc.
STAY TUNED!
highway star -
the so-called name calling from me started after THawk questioned my morals,ethics and content of my case. So if you are going to bite me a new one, sharpen your teeth on everyone else as well.
THawk -
I have gave you my side and at this point I really do not care if you dont think it adds up or not. I gave you the facts, I gave you the details and if it doesn't make up to you then it simply doesnt add up. You have made your judgement, in fact, I think you made your judgement before you even heard my side and no matter what the evidence was I could present to you.
Know to all others. Yes I am now on a mission I have never denied that. It is for several reasons. One, read the OOIDA history regarding their fight against the policy and practices of DAC. You would then see that even the OOIDA feels that the DAC report (which is supported by the American Trucking Association) has many holes and problems within their system. You would see that it is not just me that feels the DAC report is unfair, that it is open for individual comments and feelings entered by the carriers. I will be working through the OOIDA in the next several days to see what if any assistance they would be willing to provide. If you do the proper research you will see that several lower courts have questioned the ethics and practices of DAC - even though that same court failed to require DAC to make any specific changes, only taking proposed changes from DAC as any needed changes.
A new driver reporting agency will be developed within the next few months to allow drivers to report infractions, violations, etc in regards to carriers. It is my believe this is a much overdue tool for drivers to see when considering a move to a carrier. The site will not be supported by ads from carriers but other 'outside' companies, perhaps insurance companies, truck manufacturers, truck dealers, etc.
STAY TUNED!
chuckwagon
Seasoned Expediter
The truck was not loaded. The only equipment of the carrier on the truck was the QC. No I did not hold back BOL's.
As far as a threat to hide or damage the equipment I believe I did not do that - I know I did not threaten to damage the equipment, hiding it would be up to each individual.
Not until the o/o and I agreed to an exchange was I asked an address of where the truck was and at that time he was told.
As a side note stay tune for updates on my case against DAC and the carrier. In addition, I will post this on my new site, as soon as I get the site registered and setup.
The site will be designed for drivers only to report carriers and o/o. If they get to report drivers - drivers should be able to do the same and shortly they will be able to.
Name suggestions for the site is being accepted.
I am thinking about DRAC: Driver Reports Against Carriers
As far as a threat to hide or damage the equipment I believe I did not do that - I know I did not threaten to damage the equipment, hiding it would be up to each individual.
Not until the o/o and I agreed to an exchange was I asked an address of where the truck was and at that time he was told.
As a side note stay tune for updates on my case against DAC and the carrier. In addition, I will post this on my new site, as soon as I get the site registered and setup.
The site will be designed for drivers only to report carriers and o/o. If they get to report drivers - drivers should be able to do the same and shortly they will be able to.
Name suggestions for the site is being accepted.
I am thinking about DRAC: Driver Reports Against Carriers
targuard86
Expert Expediter
What will be the basis for your case against DAC?
What did they do wrong in your mind? Don't they have a disclaimer that is provided to all their subscribers that strongly encourages them to do their own research before using the information they provide? They also have an appeals process and will allow you to place a rebuttal if you feel the information is incorrect.
I agree that companies should do more research and not just use the information at face value but in my mind that is an issue with the hiring company, not DAC.
DAC doesn’t say, “Do not hire this person.†They only say that it has been reported by one of our members that this person did
“blank†and its up to the company that reviews the information to decide what to do with it.
I get the feeling that you are like the person who tells the judge and jury that he is sorry for driving drunk but its clear that he is only sorry that he got caught.
What did they do wrong in your mind? Don't they have a disclaimer that is provided to all their subscribers that strongly encourages them to do their own research before using the information they provide? They also have an appeals process and will allow you to place a rebuttal if you feel the information is incorrect.
I agree that companies should do more research and not just use the information at face value but in my mind that is an issue with the hiring company, not DAC.
DAC doesn’t say, “Do not hire this person.†They only say that it has been reported by one of our members that this person did
“blank†and its up to the company that reviews the information to decide what to do with it.
I get the feeling that you are like the person who tells the judge and jury that he is sorry for driving drunk but its clear that he is only sorry that he got caught.
Redbird Girl
Seasoned Expediter
There is a way to get a copy of your DAC and then with it they give you info on how to change an imput by a company. There is recourse.Send an message to snowball, he got a copy of his.
Redbird Girl-LIVESTRONG-LIVE LONG
Redbird Girl-LIVESTRONG-LIVE LONG
Tennesseahawk
Veteran Expediter
You'd think someone would get a copy of his/her DAC report before going on a full-blown crusade. At least an educated businessman would want ammo before throwing the accusations.
"If I claim to be a wise man, it surely means that I don't know." - Kansas
"If I claim to be a wise man, it surely means that I don't know." - Kansas
letzrockexpress
Veteran Expediter
Pardon me for arriving so late to this party but I feel the need to add my 2 cents. Someone else owns the truck, right? They asked you (for whatever reason) to bring it back, right? You didn't take it back (for whatever reason) right? O.K., what is so hard to understand? It isn't your truck, the person who owns it wants it back. TAKE IT BACK. I, like Terryandrene, remember you talking about holding the truck hostage. Where I come from that is called larceny. I think you often get a bad rap on this forum, but this time you were, in my opinion, dead wrong. You shouldn't have kept the truck. What would you have done if were the other way around? Hmmmmm....I wonder.
chuckwagon
Seasoned Expediter
First of all if it was my truck and my driver did that I would have paid him in the first place avoiding this incident. Or did we forget the o/o did not pay me - THAT IS THE FIRST ISSUE THAT IS WHAT STARTED THE WHOLE THING OR DID YOU PEOPLE FORGET THAT - THE THE HONEST OWNER OPERATAOR TRIGGERED THE WHOLE INCIDENT!
Sure I had his truck - but the first issue of nonpayment of money should be addressed here first!
STOP PROTECTING THIS SCUM AND THE SCUM CARRIER WHO PROTECTED HIM!
Sure I had his truck - but the first issue of nonpayment of money should be addressed here first!
STOP PROTECTING THIS SCUM AND THE SCUM CARRIER WHO PROTECTED HIM!
sixwheeler
Expert Expediter
I will probably regret this, but here goes anyway...It seems if memory serves, from reading your previous posts on various threads,
1.you had some type of lease purchase agreement with this guy.
2.the owner got 500 + some odd dollars per week + a percentage of the gross which I believe was 15%, leaving you 85%.
3.You worked I believe 1 week and didnt gross much.
4. The owner took his share off the top and pretty much left you zip.
5.Now you claim he didnt pay you at all.
6. Now the guys chasing his truck down, and its got to be a major league hassle for him.
Is that pretty much it?
1.you had some type of lease purchase agreement with this guy.
2.the owner got 500 + some odd dollars per week + a percentage of the gross which I believe was 15%, leaving you 85%.
3.You worked I believe 1 week and didnt gross much.
4. The owner took his share off the top and pretty much left you zip.
5.Now you claim he didnt pay you at all.
6. Now the guys chasing his truck down, and its got to be a major league hassle for him.
Is that pretty much it?
Chuck: IMO, what started this mess was your attitude. From jump street, you refused to take the advice offered here about researching the owner, talking to his other or former drivers, and most importantly: getting an experienced transportation attorney to review the contract offered before signing. The next bit of advice you ignored was to fulfill your end of the contract, no matter what else transpired, because that's how an honorable [and smart] person behaves. Any breach of contract from the owner could have been resolved by using the law, which is why it exists.
You spit on all the advice offered, even after you got into a mess, and you still blame EO for your trouble?
You spit on all the advice offered, even after you got into a mess, and you still blame EO for your trouble?