Class action anti-trust law suit against van lines

Our open community forum is for general moving related questions, comments, and useful information about local and interstate moves.
User avatar
twalker
Site Admin
Posts: 3493
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2003 11:46 am

Re: Class action anti-trust law suit against van lines

Postby twalker » Sat May 19, 2007 6:04 pm

For what it's worth.... there's another new class-action law suit with the same complaint. This one is in Illinois:

http://www.movingscam.com/files/2007-Mo ... ction2.pdf

The additional case seems to add merit to the complaints, however, it will be the courts who eventually decide who is right or wrong. In the meantime it's good to hear so many different views, and good ideas on the topic.

Tim Walker
Movingscam.com

ArchieWhite
Posts: 2942
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 11:38 am

Re: Class action anti-trust law suit against van lines

Postby ArchieWhite » Mon May 21, 2007 7:21 am

Yes, and now this opens the door for every state to accept class action suits from the thousands of tassel loafered weasels out there with plenty of ammo to use against a fundamentally profit bereft industry. And as the industry struggles, there are those of you out there, and you know who you are, that are enjoying every minute. Enjoy it now, as someday you may need to move and hire a bunch of strong backs and weak minds, and there may not be any available.

MusicMom
Posts: 19323
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 11:51 am
Location: DC Metro

Re: Class action anti-trust law suit against van lines

Postby MusicMom » Mon May 21, 2007 7:32 am

"Tassel-loafered weasels"? :lol:

ArchieWhite
Posts: 2942
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 11:38 am

Re: Class action anti-trust law suit against van lines

Postby ArchieWhite » Mon May 21, 2007 8:48 am

translation.......lawyers

Jim
Posts: 711
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2006 6:42 pm
Location: Sunny Southern California

Re: Class action anti-trust law suit against van lines

Postby Jim » Mon May 21, 2007 11:17 am

I had some time to kill, so I read the complaint Tim put up there and I have to tell you that I'm not certain how the class will prevail. The class seems to assert that the companies are making excessive profits from the fuel surcharge - the problem I see is that the companies retain very little (we used to pass through 95% of the fuel surcharge to the O/O's) of the fuel surcharge, so how they can't profit from something they don't retain? The lawyers cite a decision made earlier in the year stating that railroads should not profit from a fuel surcharge. However, there is a vast difference in the sense that the railroads keep their surcharges, whereas the movers don't. Since the O/O's are the ones who profit (or not profit) from the fuel surcharge, I don't see how the moving companies can profit from something they really don't keep.

Here's a typical scenario from paragraph 75 and please O/O's don't laugh....

A trip from DC to Charleston SC is 500 miles (1000 round trip assuming dead head back to DC); with gas at $3.00/ gallon and the average MPG about 5MPG, the fuel cost would be about $600. Now if the move in question had a transportation charge of $9,000.00, the fuel surcharge would be about $1350...etc... and this would be the excess....

5mpg? Really? Transportation of $9,000 for a 500 mile trip? Maybe someone can find out how much weight would need to be tarried for transportation of $9,000 for 500 miles. I would think it be a lot....

The other assertion of price fixing under RICO seems a bit far-fetched as well. Since the fuel surcharge is based on the price of diesel fuel (1) the information of which is avaiable to all companies, and (2) the calculations are all pretty standardized based on tariff, the only way the class can prevail is if they can prove the tariff is faulty - which is really their only avenue for success. In that case, United and the other defendents (with the possible exception of the AMSA and the STB) still would not be guilty because of the requirements they had to be in compliance with 400-N. They would simply be ordered not to charge for a fuel surcharge which would make the price of moving go up...again. I mean they're still going to bill the equivalent of a fuel surcharge by reducing the discount off tariff, however the O/O's will get short-shrifted in that deal because the moving companies will pass less down to the O/O's than a fuel surcharge...

I noticed Bekins is also being sued in this case - they will quickly assert they aren't part of the case because the case asserts all defendents used the 400-N tariff, which Bekins doesn't use..... I guess I don't like the case......poor research, bad assumptions, and poor execution....
It's Sunny Somewhere In The World

ArchieWhite
Posts: 2942
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 11:38 am

Re: Class action anti-trust law suit against van lines

Postby ArchieWhite » Mon May 21, 2007 11:30 am

$9,000 for moving 500 miles is impossible....with a typical 65% discount, that would be about 2.5 full truck loads.

Jim
Posts: 711
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2006 6:42 pm
Location: Sunny Southern California

Re: Class action anti-trust law suit against van lines

Postby Jim » Mon May 21, 2007 11:39 am

That's sort of what I thought..... I should also note that the 1st lawsuit linked by Tim (and finally decided to read) is virtually identical to the Illinois suit. The Illinois suit is based on the 1st suit all the way down to the exact faulty scenario previously referenced (DC to Charleston - 500 miles with $9,000 in transportation). However, as also previously stated, the fuel surcharge is not retained by the moving companies, so there is nowhere either class can go to collect or prevail.
It's Sunny Somewhere In The World

EastCoastMover
Posts: 173
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 1:48 pm
Location: Indiana

Re: Class action anti-trust law suit against van lines

Postby EastCoastMover » Mon May 21, 2007 5:16 pm

ill offer this "settlement" to the suit....if you can get me loads that pay 9000.00 l/h for 500 miles, i'll not only not charge a fuel surcharge, i'll gas up your car. no charge........ :)

stefano
Posts: 19
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2004 10:00 pm
Location: boston

Re: Class action anti-trust law suit against van lines

Postby stefano » Thu May 24, 2007 3:09 am

Quick question- if the formula for the fuel surcharge is supposed to accurately reflect the increase of cost of fuel, why would it be discounted by some companies(not to mention the fact that different companies use different discounts)?

Fred0844

Re: Class action anti-trust law suit against van lines

Postby Fred0844 » Thu May 24, 2007 5:40 am

- fuel surcharge is based on net linehaul
- linehaul is based on size of shipment and distance travelled
- discount is based on supply and demand and varies because of antitrust laws.

The fuel surcharge reflects the average.

stefano
Posts: 19
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2004 10:00 pm
Location: boston

Re: Class action anti-trust law suit against van lines

Postby stefano » Tue Apr 06, 2010 4:30 pm

There is an update on this case:

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/33148343/MOVINGCLASSACTION

Partial judgement was granted in favor of the Plaintiffs/Moving Customers. The case is currently on appeal.


Return to “Open Community”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: MSN [Bot] and 15 guests