uShip “safepay” is a tool that is not received at all on uShip.com. The reason? Why in the hell should we allow uShip to our money?

//////

woodyv commented on a reply in What are online payments through SafePay?, a question about uShip.com.

I can’t answer for Corey, but i’m saying i’m being forced to prioritize, my cash customers come first. All my customers do not come from uship. Safe pay customers may have to waite a little longer.

//////

woodyv commented on a reply in What are online payments through SafePay?, a question about uShip.com.

I can’t answer for Corey, but i’m saying i’m being forced to prioritize, my cash customers come first. All my customers do not come from uship. Safe pay customers may have to waite a little longer.

We already have a guarantee that we will get paid!!!! They fork over greenbacks or they don’t get their shipment!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!We can handle that part on our own as we have for two decades!!!!!!!

Why don’t we have a choice?

This is a great example of why we have to have strict Q&A policies. I honestly think that the time and effort spent trying to game the system cant be worth the $5. This is exactly what a fraudster would do to encourage the customer to use the less safe payment option, and is not allowed for the protection of the customer.

You seriously believe that paying cash on delivery is less safe than giving a web site you know nothing about all your money? In what world were you raised???

And PS I take offense to you insinuating and the libelous defamatitory tone your postpost represented with the term “fraudster”.

No one is calling you a fraudster, what we’re saying is that this would be the type of tactic that a fraudster (not you) would use to steer a customer away from the safer payment option – and then they would have a really compelling reason why they needed an upfront payment via western union or wire transfer. We see TSP’s post their phone numbers and try to direct customers offline all the time. Our Q&A rules are there to protection of the customer and the integrity of the site.

they are not giving us a choice, they telling us that we have to do it,I will get pay before the load gets off the trailer, I don’t need the safepay or want it stinks period !!!

Sure looked that way. The reference was still inappropriate given the tone.

I asked you valid questions and your response was misrepresentable which I rebutted and you ignored. Nick’s response was down right hostile and insulting.

Every business has a certain level of % failure rate and it allways will have. The safepay system is at best convenient and at worst expensive to the users. Your mandates are at best well intended and at worst unethical.

Absolutely, 100%, correct. Matt has no intention of even entertaining any kind of honest discussion or consideration of opinions other than his own. He has made up his mind, previous to any interaction with the entire TSP community, and is now merely dancing with those of us who are complaining, until we tire. He has no intention of doing anything at all to accommodate any of our wishes. We are wasting our time with him. BTW, everyone with half a brain knows uShip’s Q & A rules are their for one main reason; the protection of the collection of the fee, because the programmers can’t figure out a business model that would allow uShip to collect the fee if TSPs could actually have legitimate conversations with the customers. Most TSPs would bail and deal with the customer directly, cutting uShip out of the equation. ~Jim Henderson

Good question. Right now we don’t have the ability to change prices after the payment has been processed. If you have an agreement in place with the customer covering W&I issues, then you should be able to invoice the customer for an additional charges from the carrier. Right now you can handle that directly just as you do for customer who do not pay online.

Absolutely nothing inappropriate, the comment was just misinterpreted. Some of you guys don’t seem to be considering that this online payment option is a way to combat fraud – which is one of the reasons why it has to be a customer option.

Guys, we have made up our minds on this – but not without 2+ years of research and feedback from the whole community (not just TSPs). We did not make this decision without considering user feedback and extensively testing it first. I’m trying my best to help communicate our reasons behind this and share our data. I firmly believe that this will make uShip an easier, safer and more platform for shipping – and will result in you more business for all our TSPs. Many of our TSPs that have been using this for 18+ months were skeptical at the beginning have since experienced the benefits and grown to really like online payments.

The only way to cover all bases with safe pay is to make it optional, not really that complicated. People are more receptive to things not forced on them.

Yup, biting the hand that feeds uShip and threatening to cut off the hand completely if you don’t play their game.

I’ll bid on jobs that pay in cash if I bid at all and the others can just sit and wait…

Guys,we have made “our” minds on this – and yours

The only thing SafePay does is reduce your costs and complicate our business. Thanks but no thanks.

When you change your mind let me know and maybe I’ll consider adding uShip back into our network of business generation resources.

Just FYI; My corporation is a private shareholder enterprise and the shareholders / management in my company make our policies.

Maybe they can put their testing and their minds behind the wheel in a truck.

You see Matt; I have my own brain and MY mind has been made up. If a shipper can’t tell me how and when my company will be paid for the service OUR company provides to OUR customers then we simply can not offer them a bid to win their business and service their shipment.

Why don’t you plug that formula into your beta testing algorythems and see how those results come out…

Corey,

Your customer is in charge of you getting paid in a timely manner. They are the ones releasing the funds to you. If you are concerned, then make sure they print out the payment code and hand it to you at delivery. From there it is up to you to decide when and how you want to withdraw your money. You only need to rely on uShip if you cannot get a hold of your customer at all.

Metalmangler,

We’re opting TSPs in because we are slowly moving to a uniform type of payment. Payment can cause a lot of friction and confusion. This way our mutual customers can make a safe, smooth transaction, and they won’t have to pay up to three different times for one shipment.

Meredith C, Very interesting, so now you’re acknowledging that the shippers are your customers. What happened to the “matching” service? In six years and over a hundred matches, I have had zero friction or confusion over payment, only startled realization that uShip gets all that money that they take “on my behalf” when the bid is accepted. If there is any confusion common to our customers, it is that they are confused as to how much uShip actually makes on any given transaction. Of course, you don’t want them to know that, and this system that Matt, you, and your cohorts have dreamed up is just another ruse to hide uShip’s take even deeper, and to further enrich uShip’s coffers at the expense of the TSPs. It’s okay. Someday, another true matching service (not someone pretending not to be a broker) with reasonable fees and fair, transparent operating policies will be developed and that will be the beginning of the end of uShip. Good luck while your good fortune lasts. Walmart is coming. ~Jim Henderson

Guys – We obviously can’t have you both on here not only saying how you are breaking our rules, but also encouraging other TSP’s to do the same. If you don’t agree to the new customer payment option, then please don’t use the site.

We’ve gone into great detail to explain our new payment option, our reasoning for it and its benefits. We have done our best to answer your questions and listen to your complaints, but we simply can’t allow you to overtly break the rules. This is your last warning or we’ll be forced to suspend your accounts.

Jim, I digress. SafePay is the beginning of the end of uShip as they will if not already have alienate all the TSP’s that make this site work.

Unless uShip plans to buy their own trucks it’s hard to make money off unmatched listings. You and I both know many shippers here are not as dumb as folks might believe and they alreay have lower cost alternatives which many are using regularly.

I have at least 15 local shippers that no longer use uShip and when I can’t service them they will list the shipment online but not here…

Encouraging TSP’s to break our rules and overtly stating that you are as well is clearly not acceptable. Fair warning, we will suspend your account if you continue.

Matt. Do not put words in my mouth! I have not told anyone to break any rules and the new payment system is not an OPTION for us. You have pointed out several times before that it is our choice to use the site or not and that is all I stated in my post.

Like I said before if you do not want to allow honest opinion in your “public” forum then don’t have a forum or offer something more private like a conference call or a private message system or email.

You can keep telling us until your blue in the face how good you think this is for us but you are not the one managing our business cash flows.

Only time will tell if this is good for uShip but it is my belief that you will see an immediate decrease in active bids, users and listings. That will ultimately be the real test that will determine the direction you take.

Just like Obama’s vision for our country I think you will find your vision may be blurred and the result will not be what you expect.

Would you accept the IRS suddenly choosing to control all your revenue flows only releasing your funds once you met their criteria?

Clear FTC and discrimination?

Matt: Hello, Meredith has informed me that you are reading these SafePay Feedbacks, so, this is a hypothetical situation I am giving you so you can tell me your answer.

1- I am traveling to pick up a vehicle that is 450 miles from me, and while I am passing mile marker 348, Shipper gets a call from his cousin and tells him there is no need to ship the car anymore and he will take a couple of days off and bring it to him. All of a sudden my BlackBerry shows me a message that the Shipper has requested a Cancellation. Shipper paid through the new SafePay system and wants his money back from Uship, and threatens to place a Charge Back on the transaction. Since I had NO DEPOSIT AT ALL FROM THIS GUY OR FROM USHIP, now I am 696 miles in the hole or exactly $278.40 in diesel costs (if I didn’t have to put up some extra money for Tolls)……plus food and other expenses including employee salary. That is, IF the TSP has a Blackberry or SmartPhone. If not, he will be in the hole the whole 900 miles because he would find out about the cancellation after he traveled 450 miles to get the vehicle. Now, can you please tell me who is going to pay for that ?

Thats the problem…..it is not an option…..uShip says use it or leave

Big city;

I would bet the shipper will get a full refund of your money and uShip will keep their deposit on account for the shippers next listing..

Hi there again Matt; Here is another situation; Shipper books a shipment for a car that is at a dealership, 1,345 miles from his hometown and 355 miles from TSP base of operations. Shipper requests that TSP picks it up on a specific date and a specific time. Shipper pays for shipment through SafePay. TSP plans his route to make that possible and when he gets to the dealer, he does it at 9 AM (The specific time agreed on) on the specific date, then the dealer manager tells him that the paperwork for the car is not ready, and that the car can’t be retrieved until next day at 2 pm. TSP is driving a 10 car hauler and has a full load of cars that needed to be kept in transit and can not wait for this car, but he already traveled 355 miles in order to get it, and has NO DEPOSIT FROM THIS GUY OR FROM USHIP. Who is going to pay for the costs of going to the dealer and make this attempt to get this car ?

Where is the statistics of this 18 month beta test, where are the TSPs that participated, why have they not spoken up in the forum on the virtues of this option. Until 10 days ago this is the first I have ever heard of the Safe Pay option, not even a whisper of it.

This program seems to victimize the TSPs that are producing high quality service for shippers by automatically opting them in. I would think it should be the opposite by making those new to U Ship or those TSPs with a less than desirable ranking to be automatically opted in and those with a proven track record a choice as they have demonstrated a service and environment of trust with past shippers as there feedback demonstrates.

Matt, U Ship is a great concept. It unfortunately has demonstrated by past actions that it can not resolve issues on programs it already has initiated (i.e. Apps, Phone notifications, support on the weekends) I just can not bring myself to believe that, based on past performance, that you will be able to resolve issues that arise from the Safe Pay option. Especially when you have no control over Safe Pay policy.

Well, from what I have read so far it is. The shipper has the option of an online payment or not. That is their right and choice, its a free country. However, if they do chose that option and Matt’s statistics say 2 out of 3 do. Then there should be an icon saying who is opting for this payment option, so those TSPs that don’t want to accept the option can choose who to bid on and not to bid on. Right now were all shooting in the dark and its my guess that a huge number of cancellations are about to hit the deck. I have already seen the effect on the site.

Like I said elsewhere;

Trust and respect is earned… especially in business when it comes to $$$.

EDIT: I just read that Safe Pay is not the same as Safe Pay Payment Solutions (a Pay Pal clone). I would have thought that you would have thought the name through a little better over the past 18 months. If not for legal reasons, it should have been for establishing trust with those that are being subjected to this mandate.

This is one more reason why I feel that this program in its present form is an ill conceived idea. You expect us to trust you with our money and you overlook the simple detail of a name. For the past ten days I have been under the impression that you were partnering with Safe Pay Solutions. I did NOT release that U Ship wanted to be the next Pay Pal.

I would urge you to step back, examine some of what has been said by some intelligent people on this topic and perhaps consider that in its present form you have not addressed all the angles and presents more cons than pros that could have a profound impact on U Ship.

its all about profit for uship is not about the shippers or carriers is hard to believe that this is allowed in today America they can blah,blah,blah all they want IS NOT RIGHT how they force that into us , I have a couple cross country bids that used safepay I can’t do them spend all my cash fixing my trucks, now without sign up for safepay the they telling that I have to do it,but no money STINKS !!!!!!!!!!!

it is designed to benefit uship and uship ONLY, any one can see that.!!!!!!!!

Matt; You are completely right about one thing, people prefer paying online, but your statistics doesn’t say that they prefer to PAY YOU THE MONEY THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO PAY ME ! I have a VERY GOOD WAY OF getting paid, UPFRONT USING PAYPAL and I was doing very good ! But, don’t worry, I guess you don’t need our opinion, because soon you might end up hauling the shipments yourself ! I just re-newed my Central Dispatch Membership, and I am pretty sure thousands of my fellow Uship TSP will do the same.

I have poured over the blog Matt…One TSP gave reluctant sort of a thumbs up. Outside of that…not a thing but rhetoric. Where are the Beta TSPs or shippers? Heather was asked the same question on the blog and not a thing. I the customer before doing business should be able to get a reference and feedback. Whats good for the goose should be good for the gander.

Nobody asked me if I would accept the booked shipment before it was booked! Get rid of this!!!

WHY ARE THE TRANSPORTERS BEING CHARGED THE SAFEPAY FEES? THAT IS TAKING MORE MONEY FROM THE TRANSPORTERS. ALSO WHAT HAPPENS IF THE SHIPPERS DOESN’T GIVE THE TRANSPORTER THE CODE TO BE ABLE TO GET PAID? SAFEPAY IS A BIG JOKE, I DON’T LIKE RELEASING A VEHICLE TO A PERSON WITHOUT BEING PAID RIGHT AWAY. WHY SHOULD THE TRANSPORTER HAVE TO WAIT 3BUSINESS DAYS FOR THE FUNDS TO BE RELEASED.

They have to be Brokers or Freight Forwarders to be opted out of SAFEPAY so they can bid lower than they normally do than a TSP because they dont have the FEE’s a LEGAL TSP does. SOUND FAIR?

If you are considering creating “patches” for the “Flaws” that Uship has, you should be able to allow the TSP’s get the 50% of the “prepayment” SafePay generates on the shipments, so the TSP’s don’t have to be basically financing the movement of the shipment with their own money ! And please, don’t write about testimonials, they seems to me “fake”, if there were testimonials, you will see them over here written by the TSP’s, not by you !!!!!!!!!!

A carrier that does not require a deposit and have an enforceable contract is asking for trouble and is begging for issues with unsavory shippers. So, maybe your new system should have been for the deposit instead of the entire amount. I would have been open to that as I collect most my deposits by CC, my exposure would have been the same.

However, the notion that a customer has more skin in the game using a credit card is ludicrous. A simple call to the CC company to dispute the charges and they are out of the game. Since you are neutral (3rd) party you can not address the dispute. Which means you will need to pass the buck and debit to our account. Leaving it to us to deal with a charge back dispute through a 3rd party (I won’t even go into the ramifications if the money is swept into a PP account). A very awkward and costly situation for the TSP.

Perhaps you should of come up with a standardized cancellation policy to go hand in hand with your payment policy. This would have at least made this issue a little more palatable by giving an “UP” side to the TSPs. If we have to pay more, at least we would have some value for our money.

I can almost here Julie Andrews belting out the song ” Spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down”. Where is Mary Poppins when you need her.

Back when I was first contacted when they put this SafePay in motion I was told the following by Heather;

“Hi Robert,

Thank you for your reply and feedback. This is definitely an optional program and we understand that it might not be ideal for every business set-up. Our hope is that this program opens up Service Providers to accept credit card payments, whereas before they might not have been able to. It simply gives more options… Also, you treat the ‘code’ as ‘same-as-cash’, so if you need funds up front, then you would just need the customer to agree to release the code to you at the beginning vs. at delivery. ”

Now we are being told we must deliver first before the code is released?

And this surprises you Robert? Harken back to the “Book it Now” days before the change when you got 3 different answers from three different reps on the same policy question. This is what makes me very, very apprehensive about this new deal, very little forethought and no united front.

EXACTLY! When there is no trust based on experience (not rhetoric) how can anyone confidently turn over cash flow control? uShip has a history of revamping and issueing new policies with complete disregard in how it affects you mid stream.

Anyone over the age of 10 knows “Those that control the money hold all the power thereby dictating destiny.”

I am not at all happy about this Safepay, you take enough out of our pockets already. Do I have to bend over and take this? It should be up to US the transporters, I understand some people are low enough to cheat people out of money…This is going to effect our shipments badly, most are not willing to pay in full RITE NOW, therefore when a bid is accepted and they find that full payment is due NOW. OH man, bids are going to be declined like crazy and for what…SHIPPING NO LONGER REQUIRED because they going somewhere else. TSP’s deserve the choice, USHIT should not make it for us, Uship, your not doing us any favors and I am MAAAAAAADDDDDDDD!!!!!!!!!

I could go on and on but I think you get the picture. We as TSP’s are looking for solutions to simplify the process, not make a difficult job harder! When you complete a cash transaction it is just that, “COMPLETE”. We dont want to make a delivery in Seattle and find out in Miami that there is a problem. Its just to risky! We’re already bidding bottom dollar and cant afford these kind of problems. A comment was made on one of the forums a few weeks ago that TSP’s were afraid of Safepay because there would now be a paper trail. I hope this is not an indication of who Uship thinks we are. In my travels the TSP’s that I have run across have all been hard working men and women, much like myself who were entrepreneurs, execs, or skilled craftsmen in other industries who needed a new opportunity. There needs to be a balance between the needs of Uship, its customers, and the TSP’s. An additional 2.25% in fees, delayed payment, and taking away the peace of mind that a cash transaction affords doesnt feel too balanced! Fortunately I have other skill sets that I can easily transition back to!

YOU GUYS ARE LIARS…”EXTENDED PHONE SERVICE HOURS” MY A$$, I JUST CALLED IT’S 10 AM EST AND YOU RETARDS ARE STILL SLEEPING, BUT THAT’S OK I’LL LEAVE A MESSAGE AND WHEN YOU FEEL LIKE CALLING ME BACK I’LL BE TELLING YOU WHERE TO LOOK FOR YOUR SHIPMENT.

FORCE ME TO TAKE A ELECTRONIC PAYMENT AND THEN YOUR GOING TO CHARGE ME EXTRA FOR DOING IT???? ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR MIND???

MAYBE I’LL OPEN UP A ###########FREE########## WEBSITE FOR SHIPPERS LIKE A CRAIGSLIST WEBSITE FOR SHIPPING……………..

Hi Lauren,

WHERE IS MY OPTION TO NOT ACCEPT YOUR EXTRA CHARGES???????????

WHY THE HELL WOULD YOU RETARDS CHARGE THE PROVIDER A SERVICE CHARGE FOR THE SHIPPER USING YOUR ONLINE PAYMENT SYSTEM??????

MAKE THE SHIPPER PAY FOR USING THEIR CREDIT CARD!!! OR BETTER YET……………WHY DON’T YOU EAT THE COST YOURSELVES???

NOW CUT AND PASTE ME A REPLY.

http://scamship.com/groups/uship-user-tsp-or-shipper/documents/

http://www.traviscad.org/tcad_search.php?mode=name&kind=real

Go to this web address and put “CHASEN” in the search line and then when the next page shows up you can click on MATTs name. He has a nice little place built in 1941 with 1741 Sq ft with 1 bathroom, the only good thing is they were the owners in 2000 is far as this site shows and the assessed value then was half of what it is today which is a good thing but the TAX MAN is eating up your equity, now look at what Travis County says it worth today and his Tax bill. Better him than me, maybe we can stop in for Coffee when he is home. The Amount Due that was paid on 1/31/20011 was $10198.76

http://getsatisfaction.com/getsatisfaction/topics/how_do_i_block_users_who_are_spamming_and_abusing

http://getsatisfaction.com/getsatisfaction/topics/several_issues_regardings_banning_and_un_banning_members_from_our_community

https://s3.amazonaws.com/satisfaction-production/s3_images/573930/rate.png

“It is because they know their rating is poor. Why promote it! they also delete a ton of posts on their site which does not help the rating either. They are giving GET SATISFACTION a bad name”

This reply has been removed by uShip.com:

But with SafePay you do collect and hold hostage my payment from my customer… Replies can be removed by community moderators if they contain inappropriate content or private information. This was the reason given in this case:

uShip.com: “”

This reply has been removed by uShip.com:

But uShip does want to be in control of collecting and distributing the funds being paid for service contracted for which you offer no warrenty or responsibility of services because uShip wants to remain neutral… Replies can be removed by community moderators if they contain inappropriate content or private information. This was the reason given in this case:

uShip.com: “”

This reply has been removed by uShip.com:

No it is not legal and please show me the evidence of common practice elsewhere using proprietary payment forced acceptance? Every internet site out their allows the sellers to choose how and when they will be paid. It is the sellers who decide not the buyers. If the buyers don’t agree then they can opt to shop elsewhere. uShip is neither buyer or seller… uShip is a classified section on the internet. Actually, no I do not agree to accept online payments. Yes I can stop using uShip as can many others and then where does that leave uShip? No TSPs = no uShip. Replies can be removed by community moderators if they contain inappropriate content or private information. This was the reason given in this case:

uShip.com: “Post removed – Per the uShip User Agreement content posted: “Will not be libelous, threatening, harassing or defamatory. This specifically includes making legal claims of any sort about uShip employees, agents, other members, or the marketplace itself;”"

This reply has been removed by uShip.com:

I agree. It is not uShips position to deem what form of payment I accept from MY CUSTOMER. uShip is not the service provider and the shipper is not uShips customer. The TSP is uShips customer and since we are the fee payers and the customer is always right uShip needs to allow the removal of the SafePay payment option. uShip is just a dating service and once the date (match) has been made uShip has no invitation to join the party for dinner or tell the couple where they must dine.. The easiest resolution to this is to require the customer to enter their desired payment method in the listing and then if the TSP does not want to bid on a SafePay listing there won’t be an issue. If uShip continues to push this issue it will end up in many more cancelled matches and unhappy shippers and most likely a class action suit. As a matter of law there is no binding contract between the shipper and uShip as uShip is not the service provider. When a shipper agrees to accept my offer for service they are entering a contractual agreement with me and my company. Nowhere in my contract is there any reference of uShip and uShip has no legal authority to alter my company’s legal policies..If you think I’m wrong then by all means try walking into any store that does not accept checks or American Express and tell them they have too!!! Better go have a chat with the lawyers and ask them how Ma Bell made out with that whole telephone thing or maybe how did Microsoft do with that internet explorer issue… Matbe a call to Ebay and some advice from them regarding PayPal integration and the antitrust issues that situation presented? Make no mistake as your MANDATORY acceptance requirement to your customers (the TSPs) is exactly the same and just as much antitrust as Microsoft was, uShip can not hide behind the whole “user agreement” thing no more than any other company could… Replies can be removed by community moderators if they contain inappropriate content or private information. This was the reason given in this case:

uShip.com: “Post removed – Per the uShip User Agreement content posted: “Will not be libelous, threatening, harassing or defamatory. This specifically includes making legal claims of any sort about uShip employees, agents, other members, or the marketplace itself;”"

This reply has been removed by uShip.com:

There isn’t a TSP on here that I can’t find through the information highway. You are correct though in the way all the barriers get knocked down once the attorneys are involved and the courts start handing down court orders. Since Matt thinks this is so “LOL” I will be sure to bookmark and also save this forum to my disk for future reference. I only hope the folks at uShip understand what kind of a can of worms will get opened up once the courts get involved if anyone xhooses to pursue a class action. Let’s not even start with the cost of litigation! Replies can be removed by community moderators if they contain inappropriate content or private information. This was the reason given in this case:

uShip.com: “Post removed – Per the uShip User Agreement content posted: “Will not be libelous, threatening, harassing or defamatory. This specifically includes making legal claims of any sort about uShip employees, agents, other members, or the marketplace itself;”"

This reply has been removed by uShip.com:

Blah Blah Blah. “Are you going to believe what I tell you or your lyeing eyes (real world experience).”? When I accept PayPal the funds are immediately available available to us by credit/debit card, ATM or bank transfer. When I accept cash it is immediately spendable. The reason we do not accept checks or money orders is because it is not immediately negotiable… Does uShip accept checks? How about if the shippers says delivery my stuff and then I’ll send uShip the fee? Seems like you have a double standard here in that uShip gets their $$$ up front before the shipper can even contract the service provider but you want to dictate to the service provider when they can get their $$$. The “marketplace” is us Matt and we do not want this so stop trying to tell me we do. I remember when you launched the safepay option and we received an offer to participate. Back then we declined because it is not your job to collect, escrow or otherwise insert yourself into our contractual policies. Again I state; uShip is an advertising service and not a service provider. The only monies you can legally demand and collect is for your services not ours. You better check the laws carefully because this safepay issue is clearly operating as an escrow service and that is a whole nother issue which is governed by numerous State and Federal laws. We will not accept safepay and you legally can not force anyone to do so. Replies can be removed by community moderators if they contain inappropriate content or private information. This was the reason given in this case:

uShip.com: “When I accept PayPal the funds are immediately available available to us by credit/debit card, ATM or bank transfer. When I accept cash it is immediately spendable. The reason we do not accept checks or money orders is because it is not immediately negoti”

This reply has been removed by uShip.com:

Service providers who drive somewhere to do something without a contract and payment arrangement really should find another business model. Matt, the point is you do not own our company and therefore have no legal authority to dictate ours or anyone elses payment acceptance choices or any other contractual language. By requiring TSPs to accept SafePay as a payment method you are in essence executing a hostile forced escrow of cash flow. Also in your actions to limit or otherwise allow certain types of TSP’s to not be required to avide by these same terms you are additionally enacting predudicial preference in how you treat certain members. What’s next? Will you be offering reduced fees for minority owned TSPs? Will you offer preferential listing bidding for Ford or Dodge owners? I think the real point you are missing is we experienced TSPs are trying to give you our input and some advice regarding the legality of our rights and your services. You are offering an online commisioned classified service period. Your customer is the person who pays the fees. You are not authorised by any law anywhere to force any customer to allow for your escrow of their funds until such time you deem it acceptable to be released for a fee. You are not a broker and have ZERO authority to accept payment for services rendered by another company least of all those who expressly dissent. If you choose to take our money without consent we have the right to decline service. We are not your employees and as INDEPENDENT Transportation Service Providers we have every right to decline service for any reason we wish. Any adverse response from uShip would be considered inflametory and predjudice. Replies can be removed by community moderators if they contain inappropriate content or private information. This was the reason given in this case:

uShip.com: “Post removed – Per the uShip User Agreement content posted: “Will not be libelous, threatening, harassing or defamatory. This specifically includes making legal claims of any sort about uShip employees, agents, other members, or the marketplace itself;”"

This reply has been removed by uShip.com:

Actually the cash and credit price differences at gas stations are State law specific. In this instance with SafePay they are acting as an escrow bank which falls under federal regulations. Just so they understand in case uShip doesn’t know what escrow is; Escrow is what you do when you accept and hold real property or funds for the purpose of post distribution to the same or another party. The federal regulations that apply to Escrow accounts and services are very specific. If uShip was smarter they would also be aware that federal regulations limit the amount of fees an escrow account manager can take as compensation and also that an escrow can not be required for any property for which the esrow agent posseses 0% interest and or liability of loss that may occur as a result of non performance or taxing authority lien possesion. Replies can be removed by community moderators if they contain inappropriate content or private information. This was the reason given in this case:

uShip.com: “Post removed – Per the uShip User Agreement content posted: “Will not be libelous, threatening, harassing or defamatory. This specifically includes making legal claims of any sort about uShip employees, agents, other members, or the marketplace itself;”"

This reply has been removed by uShip.com:

The way I see it uShip requires most TSPs but not all TSPs to accept SafePay and the resulting incurrence of additional fees to do so is a basic violation of all three core federal antirust laws. uShip can either step up and fix this problem as we TSPs have requested or they can try and convince the FTC they are right and the laws are wrong… Just my humble opinion of course. Here is an overview of the three core federal antitrust laws. The Sherman Act outlaws “every contract, combination, or conspiracy in restraint of trade,” and any “monopolization, attempted monopolization, or conspiracy or combination to monopolize.” Long ago, the Supreme Court decided that the Sherman Act does not prohibit every restraint of trade, only those that are unreasonable. For instance, in some sense, an agreement between two individuals to form a partnership restrains trade, but may not do so unreasonably, and thus may be lawful under the antitrust laws. On the other hand, certain acts are considered so harmful to competition that they are almost always illegal. These include plain arrangements among competing individuals or businesses to fix prices, divide markets, or rig bids. These acts are “per se” violations of the Sherman Act; in other words, no defense or justification is allowed. The penalties for violating the Sherman Act can be severe. Although most enforcement actions are civil, the Sherman Act is also a criminal law, and individuals and businesses that violate it may be prosecuted by the Department of Justice. Criminal prosecutions are typically limited to intentional and clear violations such as when competitors fix prices or rig bids. The Sherman Act imposes criminal penalties of up to $100 million for a corporation and $1 million for an individual, along with up to 10 years in prison. Under federal law, the maximum fine may be increased to twice the amount the conspirators gained from the illegal acts or twice the money lost by the victims of the crime, if either of those amounts is over $100 million. The Federal Trade Commission Act bans “unfair methods of competition” and “unfair or deceptive acts or practices.” The Supreme Court has said that all violations of the Sherman Act also violate the FTC Act. Thus, although the FTC does not technically enforce the Sherman Act, it can bring cases under the FTC Act against the same kinds of activities that violate the Sherman Act. The FTC Act also reaches other practices that harm competition, but that may not fit neatly into categories of conduct formally prohibited by the Sherman Act. Only the FTC brings cases under the FTC Act. The Clayton Act addresses specific practices that the Sherman Act does not clearly prohibit, such as mergers and interlocking directorates (that is, the same person making business decisions for competing companies). Section 7 of the Clayton Act prohibits mergers and acquisitions where the effect “may be substantially to lessen competition, or to tend to create a monopoly.” As amended by the Robinson-Patman Act of 1936, the Clayton Act also bans certain discriminatory prices, services, and allowances in dealings between merchants. The Clayton Act was amended again in 1976 by the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act to require companies planning large mergers or acquisitions to notify the government of their plans in advance. The Clayton Act also authorizes private parties to sue for triple damages when they have been harmed by conduct that violates either the Sherman or Clayton Act and to obtain a court order prohibiting the anticompetitive practice in the future. Replies can be removed by community moderators if they contain inappropriate content or private information. This was the reason given in this case:

uShip.com: “The way I see it uShip requires most TSPs but not all TSPs to accept SafePay and the resulting incurrence of additional fees to do so is a basic violation of all three core federal antirust laws. uShip can either step up and fix this problem as we TSPs”

This reply has been removed by uShip.com:

Again I reiterate it is not legal and not OK for you to determine what forms of payment we independent companies must accept PERIOD. You are breaking the law and violating FTC rules by allowing certain types of TSPs to be excluded from your MANDATORY SafePay acceptance. Just because the agreements were written and or reviewed by “top attorneys” does not mean they are legal. The courts are filled with contractual arbitration cases being argued by attorneys claiming legality for clauses and practices that they have constructed and or reviewed for legalities. You are arguing like a debt collector that tells someone it’s OK for them to break the law and ignore FDCPA because they work for an attorney. Choosing to ignore the laws and trying to hide behind user agreement clauses does not permit you to violate and circumvent the very laws designed to protect the consumer (your customer (us tsps) and our customers (the shippers)). As for your interests; you are just like any other corporation that exists soley for the purpose of making a profit. Trying to convince us you are different is like Exxon trying to complain about high oil prices!! It’s why Wal-mart makes billions while the folks employed are making $8.00 an hour and living in trailer parks. Stop insulting us with your false claims about having our best business interests as your first and foremost priority within your policy changes. Not all of us are as dumb as most of the world. Replies can be removed by community moderators if they contain inappropriate content or private information. This was the reason given in this case:

uShip.com: “Post removed – Per the uShip User Agreement content posted: “Will not be libelous, threatening, harassing or defamatory. This specifically includes making legal claims of any sort about uShip employees, agents, other members, or the marketplace itself;”"

This reply has been removed by uShip.com:

The way I see it uShip requires most TSPs but not all TSPs to accept SafePay and the resulting incurrence of additional fees to do so is a basic violation of all three core federal antirust laws. <br /><br /> uShip can either step up and fix this problem as we TSPs have requested or they can try and convince the FTC they are right and the laws are wrong… Just my humble opinion of course. <br /><br /> Here is an overview of the three core federal antitrust laws. <br /><br /> The Sherman Act outlaws “every contract, combination, or conspiracy in restraint of trade,” and any “monopolization, attempted monopolization, or conspiracy or combination to monopolize.” Long ago, the Supreme Court decided that the Sherman Act does not prohibit every restraint of trade, only those that are unreasonable. For instance, in some sense, an agreement between two individuals to form a partnership restrains trade, but may not do so unreasonably, and thus may be lawful under the antitrust laws. On the other hand, certain acts are considered so harmful to competition that they are almost always illegal. These include plain arrangements among competing individuals or businesses to fix prices, divide markets, or rig bids. These acts are “per se” violations of the Sherman Act; in other words, no defense or justification is allowed. <br /><br /> The penalties for violating the Sherman Act can be severe. Although most enforcement actions are civil, the Sherman Act is also a criminal law, and individuals and businesses that violate it may be prosecuted by the Department of Justice. Criminal prosecutions are typically limited to intentional and clear violations such as when competitors fix prices or rig bids. The Sherman Act imposes criminal penalties of up to $100 million for a corporation and $1 million for an individual, along with up to 10 years in prison. Under federal law, the maximum fine may be increased to twice the amount the conspirators gained from the illegal acts or twice the money lost by the victims of the crime, if either of those amounts is over $100 million. <br /><br /> The Federal Trade Commission Act bans “unfair methods of competition” and “unfair or deceptive acts or practices.” The Supreme Court has said that all violations of the Sherman Act also violate the FTC Act. Thus, although the FTC does not technically enforce the Sherman Act, it can bring cases under the FTC Act against the same kinds of activities that violate the Sherman Act. The FTC Act also reaches other practices that harm competition, but that may not fit neatly into categories of conduct formally prohibited by the Sherman Act. Only the FTC brings cases under the FTC Act. <br /><br /> The Clayton Act addresses specific practices that the Sherman Act does not clearly prohibit, such as mergers and interlocking directorates (that is, the same person making business decisions for competing companies). Section 7 of the Clayton Act prohibits mergers and acquisitions where the effect “may be substantially to lessen competition, or to tend to create a monopoly.” As amended by the Robinson-Patman Act of 1936, the Clayton Act also bans certain discriminatory prices, services, and allowances in dealings between merchants. The Clayton Act was amended again in 1976 by the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act to require companies planning large mergers or acquisitions to notify the government of their plans in advance. The Clayton Act also authorizes private parties to sue for triple damages when they have been harmed by conduct that violates either the Sherman or Clayton Act and to obtain a court order prohibiting the anticompetitive practice in the future. <em>This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled <a href=”/uship/topics/ftc_and_safepay_antitrust/changes” target=”_blank”>FTC and SafePay Antitrust?</a>.</em> Replies can be removed by community moderators if they contain inappropriate content or private information. This was the reason given in this case:

uShip.com: “Post removed – Per the uShip User Agreement content posted: “Will not be libelous, threatening, harassing or defamatory. This specifically includes making legal claims of any sort about uShip employees, agents, other members, or the marketplace itself;”"

This reply has been removed by uShip.com:

So I see it’s the same old program… Someone posts something you don’t like and you remove it? So much for transparence… Replies can be removed by community moderators if they contain inappropriate content or private information. This was the reason given in this case:

uShip.com: “”

This reply has been removed by uShip.com:

Right and if I walk into a store that does not take checks then I can demand they start doing so. Lauren, The TSP is uShip’s customer and the shipper is the TSP’s customer. uShip has no business inserting itself into our business once the match is made. This includes collecting monies due us and or dictating when and how our comapany can choose to get paid. It’s right in your own terms and user agreement! If you don’t change this back to allow the TSP to choose what payment they will accept and opt out of SafePay then we will have no other option but to file a complaint with the FTC as well as the Consumer Protection Agency. Just FYI we have a few public officials that are our customers and I have already consulted with them as well as our attorney who is also an elected Judge. Your company is wrong and you really should consider fair warning from your members to be generous and kind… Replies can be removed by community moderators if they contain inappropriate content or private information. This was the reason given in this case:

uShip.com: “Post removed – Per the uShip User Agreement content posted: “Will not be libelous, threatening, harassing or defamatory. This specifically includes making legal claims of any sort about uShip employees, agents, other members, or the marketplace itself;”"

This reply has been removed by uShip.com:

“SafePay Solutions will pay you 15% of all the internal transaction fees generated from all the receive fee transactions for any business you refer. Just use your referral link and receive monies for all the hundreds or thousands of customers from any referral you provide that does business with SPS. Refer a business client to SafePay and receive monies from fees generated paid directly to your SafePay account forever!!! Imagine referring a small company that grows to a very large company and your referal income grows… Imagine if you referred just 2 or 3 large companies that brought you $4,000 to $6,000 per month in referral transaction fees for as long as they use SafePay. Have Merchants see the below seamless “Buy Button” interface. See examples below.” Replies can be removed by community moderators if they contain inappropriate content or private information. This was the reason given in this case:

uShip.com: “Refers to another company, not uShip’s online payment system”

This reply has been removed by uShip.com:

It is not uShips position to deem what form of payment I accept from MY CUSTOMER. uShip is not the service provider and the shipper is not uShips customer. The TSP is uShips customer and since we are the fee payers and the customer is always right uShip needs to allow the removal of the SafePay payment option. uShip is just a dating service and once the date (match) has been made uShip has no invitation to join the party for dinner or tell the couple where they must dine.. The easiest resolution to this is to require the customer to enter their desired payment method in the listing and then if the TSP does not want to bid on a SafePay listing there won’t be an issue. If uShip continues to push this issue it will end up in many more cancelled matches and unhappy shippers and most likely a class action suit. As a matter of law there is no binding contract between the shipper and uShip as uShip is not the service provider. When a shipper agrees to accept my offer for service they are entering a contractual agreement with me and my company. Nowhere in my contract is there any reference of uShip and uShip has no legal authority to alter my company’s legal policies..If you think I’m wrong then by all means try walking into any store that does not accept checks or American Express and tell them they have too!!! Better go have a chat with the lawyers and ask them how Ma Bell made out with that whole telephone thing or maybe how did Microsoft do with that internet explorer issue… Matbe a call to Ebay and some advice from them regarding PayPal integration and the antitrust issues that situation presented? Make no mistake as your MANDATORY acceptance requirement to your customers (the TSPs) is exactly the same and just as much antitrust as Microsoft was, uShip can not hide behind the whole “user agreement” thing no more than any other company could… Replies can be removed by community moderators if they contain inappropriate content or private information. This was the reason given in this case:

uShip.com: “Post removed – Per the uShip User Agreement content posted: “Will not be libelous, threatening, harassing or defamatory. This specifically includes making legal claims of any sort about uShip employees, agents, other members, or the marketplace itself;”"

This reply has been removed by uShip.com:

No suprise there. Why would uShip clearly explain the difference when the safepay option nets them higher revenues? Replies can be removed by community moderators if they contain inappropriate content or private information. This was the reason given in this case:

uShip.com: “Hostile”

This reply has been removed by uShip.com:

So the TSP is supposed to deliver the shipment without receiving payment until such time that uShip staff is available to assist in mediation through arbitration? Are you also now authorised to be an official interstate commerce arbitrator? There are also legal issues and specific laws both federal and state which apply to arbitration certification and licensing… Replies can be removed by community moderators if they contain inappropriate content or private information. This was the reason given in this case:

uShip.com: “Post removed – Per the uShip User Agreement content posted: “Will not be libelous, threatening, harassing or defamatory. This specifically includes making legal claims of any sort about uShip employees, agents, other members, or the marketplace itself;”"

This reply has been removed by uShip.com:

Matt, you continue to try and spin this as if you are not responsible but will help out those who choose to use your tools… The problem is you are not allowing the TSP (AGAIN your customer) the CHOICE but are mandating a requirement. Technicly by all labor law standards this makes you at worst the employer and at best a broker. You can not compare this payment system to a retail sale as the sale here is of a service involving manual labor and time value which has very specific attributes regarding employee employer relations and labor law standards. If you infacto insert your company into the sale and revenue collection process for labor related service then you are an employer no different then you paying your office staff to process IT and manage systems. The only way around this is for you to be a broker (like amazon is a retailer and required to collect sale taxes). Outside of those two options as an employer or a broker you simply can not mandate how we the service providers choose to conduct our business. All the spinning in the world can not circumvent real world labor and business law experience. We tried this years ago with Chauffeurs and the labor department clearly stated that if we collect the money and distribute payments then the drivers can not be considered independant contractors regardless of how the funds were paid out. Replies can be removed by community moderators if they contain inappropriate content or private information. This was the reason given in this case:

uShip.com: “Post removed – Per the uShip User Agreement content posted: “Will not be libelous, threatening, harassing or defamatory. This specifically includes making legal claims of any sort about uShip employees, agents, other members, or the marketplace itself;”"

This reply has been removed by uShip.com:

Hmm. If you’re not sure where this “script” came from then try googling “SafePay problems”. By the way if “SafePay” is your internal house system then SafePay Solutions may have a question or two regarding copyrights… Replies can be removed by community moderators if they contain inappropriate content or private information. This was the reason given in this case:

uShip.com: “Post removed – Per the uShip User Agreement content posted: “Will not be libelous, threatening, harassing or defamatory. This specifically includes making legal claims of any sort about uShip employees, agents, other members, or the marketplace itself;”"

The morale of the story is;

They delete anything they can’t answer, don’t like or has legal correctness.

Those who don’t play the markets might not understand but it really is simple. uShip collecting deposits is only 15% of the revenue they generate but never see, they only generate revenue from deposits. In other words 15% of 1 billion dollars = 150 million in deposits (uship total revenue) now with safepay they collect the whole 1 billion so now their revenues are 1 billion which means they can IPO on higher market cap and conform to market requirements for offering structure.

I can’t BELIEVE I missed this earlier!!!

BBB Business Review

This Business is not BBB accredited

Tropical Transport LLC

Phone: (401) 279-2324

770 Providence Street, West Warwick, RI 02893

On a scale of A+ to F

“F”

Business Contact & Profile

Business Name:

Tropical Transport

Business Address:

770 Providence St

West Warwick, RI 02893

Original Business Start Date:

1/1/1990

Type of Entity:

Sole Proprietorship

Principal:

Bernard Coleman, Owner

Phone Number:

(401) 486-9506

Fax Number:

(401) 390-3885

http://www.iowasexoffender.com/registrant/9908/?type=simple&lastname=nelson&firstname=&postalcode=&action=Submit+Search

http://www.uship.com/profile/jandsnelson/

They also talk about Montway Auto Transport posting autos on CD after winning them or bidding on them on USHIP. According to the FMCSA thats DOUBLE BROKERING which is Illegal

http://www.autoexpeditor.com/showthread.php?1409-Can-you-clarify-something-about-Uship/page2&highlight=uship

http://www.autoexpeditor.com/search.php?searchid=15287

http://community.uship.com/uship/topics/what_is_your_fucking_customer_service_phone_number

I’m PISSED bmon30 18 hours ago

WHAT IS YOUR FUCKING CUSTOMER SERVICE PHONE NUMBER ???

See, this is the problem with TSPs not being able to choose or discuss this payment method.:

Booked price:$444.06

Amount paid by customer:$444.06

Balance due from customer:$0.00

Booking deposit:$69.06

Payment processing fee:$9.99

Pending online payment:$365.01(will be released via uShip Payments upon completion of shipment)

This customer would have chosen an internal bank transfer to have saved money on their shipment and I could have had the funds immediately available for access. On top of all this it is costing us $79.05 or 17.80% of our bid to acquire the job… This load is 387 miles so the booking cost works out to 20.42 cents per mile!!! Too much $$$.

——————————————-

AnnesLimo replied to How do I remove the uShip Payments option from my bids?, a question about uShip.com.

Matt;

This I think bothers me most; “that we at uShip do consider our TSP to be our partners and friends”

That statement says a lot about the way you view the relationship between uShip and us. We (or I personally) am not your partner and am not here to be friends… I am your customer and as such should be respected for the service I offer to your business which makes you $$.

There is nothing wrong with making friends in business and appreciating “partnership” benefits but making decisions for others for which their is no formal “partnership” agreements and or mutual benefits and or profit share is unethical at best.

—————————————————-

ctscbob commented on a reply in How do I remove the uShip Payments option from my bids?, a question about uShip.com.

. I agree with all on here about the “Safepay” option, but my complaint is not about price, but about the uneven application of this new program. Put ALL TSPs on it, or allow us to opt out. If I feel I can’t make a fair $$$ after computing all possible fees, then I don’t bid the job. Uship fees are horrible, I agree, but if I can pass them through in the bid and still make my profit, who cares what the fees are? Level the field, even things out, and all will be fine after the adjustment period, but Matt and whoever need to flag the inappropriate comments more quickly and consistently, and to put the Safepay emblem on everyone, or on no-one.

——————————————————

doubleL replied to How do I remove the uShip Payments option from my bids?, a question about uShip.com.

AnnesLimo well put……….what bothers me the most is that I feel this is a one side patnership ,uship always making out like a bandit !!.He calls it fair prices !!?? at the end of all ” Uship is the most costly site that I belong to”

——————————————————

JHH replied to How do I remove the uShip Payments option from my bids?, a question about uShip.com.

AnnesLimo, doubleL,…..I can’t say it any better, and if I say what I really want to say, it will get deleted and I’ll get suspended. ~Jim Henderson

—————————————————–

JHH commented on a reply in How do I remove the uShip Payments option from my bids?, a question about uShip.com.

Ultimately, because of the higher costs for shippers and TSPs to do business on uShip, they are now, and will continue unless there are some dramatic changes, to go elsewhere. The outstanding marketing efforts of uShip, and some outstanding TSP’s have so far carried the ball for uShip, but under the present circumstances, this cannot and will not last. Take a look backward for about twenty-five years at all the major (not to count smaller ones) businesses that have disappeared, gone bankrupt, or both. In the restaurant industry, there is a saying that it takes two years to gain a loyal customer (that means you can make a serious mistake and it will be tolerated and forgiven) and two minutes to lose one. In any business, ignorance and arrogance is a deadly combination. ~Jim Henderson

—————————————————

ctscbob commented on a reply in How do I remove the uShip Payments option from my bids?, a question about uShip.com.

The fact that uship considers us partners does not alter the fact that we are the customer in this situation, and are not being treated well as such. If not satisfied, whe will vote with out dollars, and go elsewhere (many already use multiple sites). It seems to me that the next step in this scenario is for the government to require the records from uship as to who gets how much money, and from where. OOOPS, there goes the extra cash you were saving on the side for that trip to Aruba!!!! It comes down to control, control, control, from the top down.

————————————————————-

AnnesLimo commented on a reply in How do I remove the uShip Payments option from my bids?, a question about uShip.com.

Yes Matt, Internal same bank transfers. and they are as safe as any other means of payment with $0 cost to either customer. I understand you might think it rare but some companies like ours maintain multiple accounts across several different banks as a matter of convenience. Let’s say you want to ship something from NY to TX and you have a BOA account; you simply log on to your internet banking and transfer funds as a customer to customer transaction… Many of my customers and family do this all the time and there is no charge.

I don’t know who has convinced you into believe moving money allways costs money because mor and more banks are doing for free what most used to charge for.

————————————————————

AnnesLimo commented on a reply in How do I remove the uShip Payments option from my bids?, a question about uShip.com.

Matt,

You have an uncanny way of putting words into others mouths!! The statement “What if it would cost you twice this to market your service directly to acquire this customer (if even possible)? If you are to say our fees are too high” was never any part of my post and I did not say or even remotely infer that.

If you reread the statement I simply pointed out that had the customer known this was costing them more they would have chosen the alternative available to them at that time.

Your position on this is somewhat hypocritical in that your main marketing strategy is and has been “cheap shipping” and your uShip guesstimator lures folks in with lowball quotes. I don’t know anyone who likes competing with the uship estimate and I do know most folks will choose the least costly option 99% of the time. That’s why people here choose bids $3 less than the next.

BTW FWIW if in the instance I posted above this customer had chosen to use a bank internal CTC transfer then at delivery the money would be in my possesion and immediately available for my wife to withdraw or spend on groceries even though I am 400 miles elsewhere away… The same apply’s for cash on delivery as I can proceed to the closest ATM and make a cash or check deposit that my wife and children have immediate access too.

You’re a relatively

—————————————————————

JHH commented on a reply in How do I remove the uShip Payments option from my bids?, a question about uShip.com.

$1,000 or more…and they’re FREE, and they’re INSTANT. But, hey, we’re all just “whistling” into the wind, because we all know what this is really about. ~Jim Henderson

————————————————-

ctscbob commented on a reply in How do I remove the uShip Payments option from my bids?, a question about uShip.com.

You guys are ALL missing the important point. It is not the $$ that matters here, it is the uneven application of regulations.

—————————————————

cdavemove commented on a reply in How do I remove the uShip Payments option from my bids?, a question about uShip.com.

ctscbob, we are all not missing the point, we all get it as ‘we’ have been discussing since this new change was implemented. And yes, $$ is important as all businesses look at the cost of doing business and the price of there product/service within the market place they compete in. Price your product/service to high to cover costs and your customer goes elsewhere. Price your product/service the same and absorb higher costs, learn to live with less so others can enjoy more? If you want a current example, just follow the SOLYNDRA case. As far as the fairness of this change and how it’s been implemented?? That’s a given. Your best option at this point is look for other options until changes are made that are fair and equal.

http://community.uship.com/uship/topics/i_dont_have_enough_cash_for_gas_to_deliver_my_shipment_because_they_paid_online

I was not sure were I want to post this. But sense there are so many this affects that this effects Ill post it here.

Yesterday I was leaked some inside info. By a very close friend that his brother is a federal agent. Seems there is a major investigation into Uship and Brokers and carriers on this site.

Uship: When you took the first payment from the customer and arranged payment to a carrier. You became a BROKER. Under federal law if you arrange the payment from a customer to a carrier. YOU MUST HAVE a security bond and insurance to cover things if for some reason you dont pay the carrier. From what I was told you guys can expect some fines for operating as a broker with out the the proper authority to do so.

Brokers: Because Uship has been operating as a broker. You and uship are going to be subject to fines and even possible loss of your operating authority for double brokering loads.

Carriers: Legal carrier. We may not have to much to worry about. As long as we have stayed in the states we have authority to run. Just make sure your tax stuff is what it should be. Im sure the irs will stick there nose in by the time its all done.

illegal carries; thanks for being here your the reason I was able to get the info I got. The agent the info came from is in charge of tracking you down in there state. You guys can expect fines for operating with out authority plus fines from the states you have run in with out authority. Plus the reason Im sure the irs will stick there nose in. Because of fuel tax you will have to pay in every one of the states you have run.

So with all that said. HOW YOU LIKE THEM USHIP PAYMENTS NOW?

Go look at this reply: http://community.uship.com/uship/topics/no_safepay_accepted?utm_content=reply_link&utm_medium=email&utm_source=reply_notification#reply_6954301

So I go to click on a book it now job, and I see that they have now made all book it now jobs mandatory uShip payment. Needless to say, I did not book it now. When you hit the book it now button and your brought to the next page, it’s on top.

That means the hard work you as a tsp have put in to earn that book it now ability,

means squat !!! I will vote a big fat yes for uShip payment when uShip starts paying me for holding my money.

Go look at this reply: http://community.uship.com/uship/topics/no_safepay_accepted?utm_content=reply_link&utm_medium=email&utm_source=reply_notification#reply_6953889

#################################

Rebuttal

From what was told to me from an insider at uship. Matt Chasen is using this payment program to show income to validate funding. Previously he was saying ALL booked amounts were THEIR income. Investors got wise. Now he needs to pay the previous investors and is doing it by showing income by their new escrow system and whoring that out to other investors.  What are your thoughts?

Hello all, MATT TAKE A MINUTE AND READ THIS.

So the other day I have a potential client ask me a question after clicking the accept button,

I have copied the question below for your reading pleasure.

“uship requires 100% paid upon acceptance. I am confused. Who am I doing business with and who am I paying and when? ”

Now, uShip said they created the uShip payment to avoid confusion for the shipper,

Hey Matt, who caused that confusion ??? Was not me. Now uShip cost me a job, and income. Matt how can you make that up to me ?

He could have only seen that by accepting my bid right. So, this tells me for sure that uShip is setting the uShip payment pre selected. Which is a monopoly.

And apparently this shipper felt uneasy with this, because he has backed up and canceled the booking before even completing it. And I have not heard another word from shipper.

Now, I don’t ask my clients for 100% payment up front why should uShip ?

UShip does not even perform a service for them.

Matt, A client pointed out to me, that she researched me, then she researched uShip, I have much better feedback then uShip, so She felt safer paying me, now I found that amusing.

I have tried to talk with you Matt and you never provide

straight or relivent answers to me, your repetitive at best, where I come from that’s a sign.

I can’t help but feel as though you have a very warped way of looking at this business deal of MINE. No offence, once MY client has accepted my business offer, you should just take your WEB SITE service fee and hit the road.

Now I really don’t mean to sound the way that this seems to sound, but, I do.

When your mistake takes money from my children it does not sit easy with me at all.

Your overdoing your involvement like a bad guest overstaying their welcome.

Such a shame.

Go look at this reply: http://community.uship.com/uship/topics/no_safepay_accepted?utm_content=reply_link&utm_medium=email&utm_source=reply_notification#reply_6953806

I suggest everyone post what they know will be hidden from the “neutral” uship on www.scamship.com. they don’t remove anything and I am sure those investigating are reading these forums too!

Go look at this comment: http://community.uship.com/uship/topics/no_safepay_accepted?utm_content=reply_link&utm_medium=email&utm_source=reply_notification#reply_6958839

Sorry, Matt, at present uShip does control the payment. uShip specifically forbids the TSPs from asking for the payment code before the delivery is made. That is control no matter how you word it….and it has been one of the main objections from the TSPs since the beginning of this program. Your attorneys hung you out to dry with the original name of your program, Matt. Just something to consider. ~Jim Henderson

Go look at this comment: community.uship.com/uship/topics/no_safepay_accepted?utm_content=reply_link&utm_medium=email&utm_source=reply_notification#reply_6958698

Dennis

what a joke. They are trying hard to be like freightview.com but will never be since they have scams, hold your money and are run by an ego-maniacal idiot.

Their page even looks like Freightviews:

http://www.uship.com/pro/

http://www.freightview.com/features/

*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/

http://uship.pissedconsumer.com/uship-reverts-to-old-payment-methods-20111201278438.html

uship reverts to “old’ payment methods.

USHIP Complaint by Amover

finally, after many months,uship has seen the error in their ways and reversed themselves on only allowing payment through their safepay/uship payments method. As many “providers or TSP’S ” refused to comply with being forced to accept payment as only uship prefered they have begun allowing “providers’ to again state that they accept cash,etc. uship originally was going to charge “providers” 2 1/4% fee for the privilage of not being allowed to ask for cash even after their bids were accepted and uship was not even participating in the transaction any longer. they eventually reversed themselves on this also,. uship made a lame decision in trying to maximize their profits and us the “float” to help boost thier bottom line but, it all back fired as TSP’S boycotted the site. Another victory for the 99%.

“Shipping Wars” TV show from A&E promotes scam site uShip.com

A&E (for the sake of ratings and profit only) promotes the scam site uShip.com on their new show “Shipping Wars”. Allowing this scam ship to be promoted on TV will perpetuate the scams and leave even more people with stolen product or money. uShip claims to be neutral but that is a joke.

uShip allows felons, tax evaders pedophiles and many other seedy transporters to bid on shipping. This goes against the DOT since they do not allow transports to be criminals but uship welcomes them with open arms since they get paid from the shipper.

BOYCOTT A&E SINCE THEY DO NOT CARE ABOUT AMERICAS BEING SAFE AND PROMOTE USHIP.COM

GOOGLE SEARCH “USHIP ILLEGAL” OR “USHIP SCAMS” OR “USHIP FRAUD”

http://www.aetv.com/news/a-e-premieres-new-original-real-life-series-%27shipping-wars%27-17203858 0

COMMENTS

Written by Agreed on December 8, 2011

I heard rumors that they are being investigated by Dateline NBC as well as the IRS for allowing tax evasion. I would think the tax evasion would stick since they allow those who have no DOT authority to ship and those illegals cannot claim that on their taxes or they would get caught!

Written by Satan on December 8, 2011

I haven’t seen any court documents that back up your accusations but I’m sure a fine upstanding citizen such as you wouldn’t find someone guilty without a fair trial. So, if not for yourself, get a conviction against this outfit for those of us who still retain the capacity for human thought.

Written by To: MauiAl50 on December 7, 2011

I’m sure they did not mean to offend you or your type of criminals!

You aren’t a pedophile are you? Felons, pedophiles and those types of criminals are by uShip’s terms of service are not allowed on their site but they let them stay even after they are made aware of them. uShip is a scam

Written by MauiAl50 on December 7, 2011

Where, exactly, in DOT regulations does it say “criminals”(pretty general term BTW) cannot be transporters?

Written by SHIPPING WARS on December 7, 2011

We would like to have any consumer that has been frauded by uShip or it’s bidders call and request to talk to the producer’s of the show “SHIPPING WARS”, A&E corp. office phone number is 212-210-1341 let them know you would like to talk to David McKillop or Elaine Frontain, Neil A. Cohen and tell these producer’s about all the fraud on uship and that about 85% of their directory for auto hauler are company’s with out operating authority (MC number) and no insurance to haul for hirer, below is the time this show will air on A&E

10-EPISODE HALF-HOUR SERIES FOLLOWS TEAMS OF INDEPENDENT SHIPPERS BIDDING FOR THE CHANCE TO TRANSPORT THE UNSHIPPABLE PREMIERES TUESDAY, JANUARY 10 AT 9PM AND 9:30PM ET/PT

A&E presents the new original real-life series “Shipping Wars, ” which follows six independent shippers who have discovered that fortunes could be made transporting items that traditional carriers won’t touch. The 10-episode half-hour series begins with back-to-back episodes Tuesday, January 10 at 9PM and 9:30PM ET/PT.

Each episode of “Shipping Wars” dives into the cutthroat world of these heavy-duty movers as they battle for the chance to transport the unshippable. The competition begins with uShip, the world’s largest online (Scam Site) house for independent truckers. Every day, thousands of shipments are put up for auction. The battle is fierce as the movers have only minutes to bid, and the lowest bidder gets the load.

…. A&E need’s to know about USHIP and their lies.

http://www.autoexpeditor.com/showthread.php?1804-Dang-UShip!!!!!!&p=19901

How do you ship a boat almost 1100 miles for only $750.00? Uship continues to allow, enable and facilitate illegal shippers. I don’t know about you guys but I cannot even come close to competing. Motorcycles shipped for 12 cent a mile? Really??? How do you compete when your insurance is $800 a month? UShip is directly responsible for stealing jobs from legal carriers. The way I see it they may as well be taking food from my family or taking from my children’s inheritance. I wish there was a way to present this to FMCSA or other authority that bends us over the rail to be legal while they allow this to happen. Maybe a class action deal? Ahh the soapbox feels good.

////////////////

Delete Ushit from memory. Never look at it again. Problem solved

///////////////

There is the winner. Now if we can smack the illegals using both it & central we’d be on to something! The only thing that would make me happier would be seeing them filing bankruptcy & closing down their servers.

///////////////

I just wait for people to call me asking for a quote to get a vehicle moved, I give them the quote, then they say, “That’s high, I had it on Uship and the guy would move it for $XXX, but he hasn’t come and gotten it yet and it’s been a month and the carrier hasn’t picked it up yet.” I tell them I wouldn’t move it for that price either.

I don’t get frustrated at U Ship anymore, I just don’t got there. If I want frustration, I just go look at C/D.

///////////////

It just cheeses me off. I had a level 1 a couple of weeks ago in Forsythe GA. The officer says he saw me coming in and was waiting for a “hot shotter” He said that they see rigs going down the road all the time with no company name or #’s and they have to let them go as they do not have “probable cause” He says when they pull them over and ask all the driver has to do is say that he is not for hire and he is free to go. Really? My guess is that is how these UShitters are getting it done. None the less they mock the DOT and FMCSA authorities by running illegally while we now face the recommendations of both forward facing and driver facing dash cams, EORB, reduced HOS.

http://www.google.com/imgres?q=jennifer+brennan+fuchs&hl=en&sa=X&biw=1366&bih=620&tbm=isch&prmd=imvnso&tbnid=mGCLmsFWq_l4VM%3A&imgrefurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.uship.com%2Fwww.uship.com%2Fprofile%2FTexasCowgirl%2F&docid=EMLM_t2PK_srSM&imgurl=https%3A%2F%2Fresources.uship.com%2Fstatic%2Fusers%2Fb6bf04ea-02f0-4026-9.jpg&w=406&h=600&ei=l9LrTrWEAuLw0gGE1vS3CQ&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=170&vpy=105&dur=2562&hovh=273&hovw=185&tx=63&ty=295&sig=111499556972011726893&page=1&tbnh=129&tbnw=88&start=0&ndsp=25&ved=1t%3A429%2Cr%3A0%2Cs%3A0

*General Comment: U-Ship is a total scam and ripoff.

Although we’ve had zero success using uship to find legal transporters in the past, we recently posted a listing for a shipment from Bullhead, AZ to Bozeman, MT. http://www.uship.com/shipment/26%27-Pro-Line-Boat-on-new-Ez…/813923928/?i=1&p=50&s=236

Even though we’ve had no past success using uship, we decided to give it another try. The same shipment was listed simultaneously on other boards we use consistently successful results.

As per uship’s instructions, we requested each bidder provide their US DOT number and MC number for verification in accordance with uship’s recommendation. We used the bid details Q & A to make the requests of individual TSPS. A couple TSPs already had their numbers listed in the profile section and those were quite easily verified. Many of the others simply did not respond to our request and their offers were subsequently declined.

One particular TSP, BOATHAULINGINC. did reply and provided what appeared to be a legitimate US DOT number and an active MC#. However, the numbers crossed to another company in the FMCSA database. Being unsure of the procedure and not sure we weren’t doing something wrong, we requested their assistance to determine if we were doing something incorrectly. We were assured (in the bid Q & A) by BOATHAULINGINC. that we were using the verification process correctly and they were affiliated with and had permission to operate under Apache Transport LLC’s authority. With the innocent intent of confirming the facts, I contacted the owner of Apache Transport LLC advising them that BOATHAULINGINC had stated they were authorized to operate under Apache Transport LLC’s authority.

I was told by the owner of Apache Transport LLC that there was no affiliation between the two companies and BOATHAULINGINC. definitely was not authorized to use his company’s authority to transport interstate. He advised me that he would contact uship and the appropriate authorities to ensure corrective action was taken.

I ask for and did receive copies of emails sent to uship’s Matt, Mickey, and Heather. These emails informed uship of the attempts of fraudulent use of Apache Transport LLC’s numbers and demanded immediate contact information so Apache Transport LLC could pursue legal action and report the offender, BOATHAULINGINC. to the appropriate authorities.

I have no futher documentation of whether uship cooperated in any effort to report to the legal authorities or not. However in subsequent emails and phone conversations with the owner of Apache Transport LLC, I was told that uship had responded by saying they would only provide that information to law enforcement authorities making the request. To me that seems quite assinine since that makes uship an obstacle by not providing the information. How can a company report illegal use when uship denies their access to the alledged offender’s identity and contact information? So rather than be constructive and assisting in the investigation of these reported offenses of illegal use of another company’s authority, uship becomes an impediment.

Today I checked the profile of BOATHAULINGINC. and it is still displayed as an active TSP. I’m certainly no legal expert, but it would seem to me that at a minimum uship would suspend BOATHAULINGINC. and prohibit them from participation until an investigation was completed. The documentation is obviously there and uship is in receipt of the complaint from Apache Transport LLC and has access to verify the legitimacy of that company.

This will certainly be our last attempt to use uship services and uship may feel free to remove our account completely. We choose not to do business with a company so obviously void of ethics and apparently more inclined to be an obstruction to justice than one of honor. We also prefer not to be insulted by BOATHAULINGINC.’s false accusations of dishonesty on our part when it is obvious and documented that they are a fradulent company operating illegally. Uship still allowed this to happen and has taken no apparent action. It would appear that uship condones this kind of conduct since they have demonstrated no visible effort to intervene or investigate BOATHAULINGINC. nor assist an honest and honorable company’s (Apache Transport LLC) effort to clear their name and publisize the fact that they have no affiliation with BOATHAULINGINC.

Below are the details of the bid Q & A including BOATHAULINGINC.’s final insult and denial. They were caught, it was documented in BOATHAULINGINC.’s own responses and the legitimate company’s complaint, still uship takes no action to preclude it from being repeated by the same TSP.

http://www.uship.com/popups/bid_details.aspx?ID=1270039

Shipment Title: 26′ Pro-Line Boat on new Ezze load trailer

Service Provider: boathaulinginc (0)

Timeframe: Service Provider is flexible on pickup dates.

Service Provider is flexible on delivery dates.

Can do within your timeframe, no problem!

Mode: Trucking

Service Type: Other

Tow on your trailer behind our power unit!

Vehicle Type: Other

Additional Info: Above payment terms are acceptable. Thank you in advance for your consideration. Please review our profile, you will see that we have 17+ years in the industry. (New to uShip, not the industry!) Can provide references upon bid acceptance. I know we are not the lowest bid you have, however, we are well worth the cost difference.

Questions for this bid:Click below to report a uShip Rules violation

Date Asked Shipper Question Answer

9/7/2008 Jroy96 (0) Thank you again for your interest and offer of service. The lowest bid is not necessarily the determining factor in this selection. I do appreciate your experience in the industry and we will consider your offer and terms. We require valid motor carrier authority is for our insurance purposes. Please reply with your assigned motor carrier authority number (MC#) for further consideration for selection. Thank you for your interest in our bid. Our numbers are DOT#1256358/MC#492537. We look forward to hearing from you soon.

9/7/2008 Jroy96 (0) Thank you for the response and for providing your DOT & MC numbers. We’ll be making the selection within the next couple of days. Based on your expereience stated, your offer will receive serious consideration. We appreciate your consideration and look forward to hearing from you and form a working relationship. Thank you

9/7/2008 Jroy96 (0) Perhaps I’m doing something wrong and you can help me get it right. When I use the uShip procedures to verify your DOT and MC numbers, it comes up as Apache Transport LLC, not Hauling Boats inc. Is that your company too or do you just have permission from Apache to use their numbers for interstate transport? Any help or information you can provide will be appreciated. You are not doing anything wrong. We are an associate of Apache Transport and run under their authority. Thank you very much.

9/8/2008 Jroy96 (0) Thank you again. I talked, by phone, with the owner of Apache Transport LLC last evening. He stated that he had no knowledge of your company and you were not authorized to submit or use the motor transport authority (DOT#1256358/MC#492537) you submitted representing them as yours. He emphatically stated there is no affiliation between Apache Transport LLC and any company DBA “Boat Hauling inc. He also advised that he would be reporting the fraudulent use to state and federal authorities today. He further stated he would be contacting uShip to report the incident and he will be filing complaints of internet fraud to federal government’s Internet Fraud Complaint Centers, i.e. IFCC, IC3 and FTC, in addition to seeking supoenas for your personal contact information from uShip.com to further both criminal investigation and civil actions. I will call Doc and get this straightened out. Thank you!

9/8/2008 Jroy96 (0) Thank you Sir, As I stated, I will call Doc and get this straightened out with him. I know him well and I know that he did not and would not say everything that you are claiming. I would also like to say that I am withdrawing my bid for your transport due to the fact that you have 1) violated uShip rules by contacting outside of uShip and 2) I refuse to deal with dishonest people that and if you are going to violate uShip rules and then lie about what was said then you are obviously a dishonest person. Have a good day!

Owner op

anytown, Connecticut

U.S.A.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

#1 Owner of Company

Boat Hauling Inc./uShip/SEMO Transport

AUTHOR: Me – Anywhere (U.S.A.)

SUBMITTED: Friday, September 26, 2008

In response to this “complaint” While it is titled “uShip” it is aimed toward my company, Boat Hauling Inc.

What the author neglects to tell you is that he is a Motor Carrier on uShip. That his daughter is the one that posted a boat to be transported. He also neglects to write that he has sent me threatening emails (how he received my email address is still beyond me.) Here is part of an email he sent to me:

I’ve also taken the liberty of forwarding the documented details to the Head of Missouri Motor Carrier Enforcement office and an organization “Stop Illegal Truckers” which is a Missouri based organization aligned with the Missouri State Highway Patrol and chartered to report and support prosecution of illegal haulers.

Should I find any evidence of your continued effort to transport without the appropriate authority, including if your profile continues to be active on uShip, I’ll assist in initiating further legal action including criminal charges of attempted internet fraud.

There was a miscommunication as far as Apache Transport which has since been straightened out as I stated it would in my communication.

Now as far as uShip, while it is a chore to find a legal carrier, it is possible. There are several legal carriers it is just a matter of doing your research.

As for: SEMO Transport Service (Author of this article) The only thing I can say about this person is that he has misrepresented himself here, as he did on uship through his daughter’s listing. He has not done his research as he is under the impression that we are affiliated with a company in Missouri, while we are based in Nevada. While I wish this person the best of luck, I sincerly hope that he verifies information in the future before making himself look like a complete idiott.

While these are terribly financially distressing times for our industry, it is no fun for anyone to be this unnecessarily vicious and dishonest.

Thank You,

Owner of

Boat Hauling Inc.

Respond to this report!

What’s this?

#2 Update By Author

The truth about BOAT HAULING INC

AUTHOR: Owner Op – Anytown (U.S.A.)

SUBMITTED: Thursday, October 09, 2008

While it is true that I, as the owner of SEMO Motor Transport Service, became involved in the verification and investigation of Boat Hauling Inc. as a result of my daughter posting a boat on uShip, seeking a legitimate carrier to transport the boat. It was at the request of my daughter I verify all prospective offers and their legal credentials. She is well aware that I’m quite knowledgeable of the transportation industry from many years experience as a government logistics and transportation program manager, a motor carrier company owner, and a transportation industry consultant. Additionally, she knows that I am quite knowledgeable of the FMCSA regulations. So it was only natural she would turn to me for assistance and advice.

While it also true that I’m a registered Transportation Service Provider on uShip, it is obvious I’m no longer actively transporting for hire nor utilizing uShip to obtain loads or shipments. My inactivity is further demonstrated by deactivation of my motor carrier authority and zero matches or bookings uShip for approximately one year.

When Boat Hauling Inc. initially responded on uShip and submitted a legal carrier’s credential as their own, I verified they were illegally and falsely claiming an affiliation with that carrier. Boat Hauling Inc. responded by saying it was a simple “miscommunication” and accused me of being a dishonest person. The so called “miscommunication” claim was quickly dispelled and proven to be a false claim by statements and actions from the owner of the legitimate motor carrier company. One of their inflammatory and accusatory statements to my daughter’s listing is presented immediately below….

Boat Hauling Inc. wrote….. “I refuse to deal with dishonest people that and if you are going to violate uShip rules and then lie about what was said then you are obviously a dishonest person. Have a good day!”

Boat Hauling Inc. precipitated the investigation with their offensive lies, false accusations, threats, and other false allegations. My objective is to close it by revealing and exposing to the public, factual evidence of Boat Hauling Inc. lies and dishonest behavior. My fervent hope is that it will result in legal prosecution and punishment of the owners of Boat Hauling Inc.

*****

Now let’s take apart Boat Hauling Inc. lies, false statements, and inaccurate information from their post above and some from the email at the bottom…. all presented by the person claiming to be owner of Boat Hauling Inc.

That is done by first presenting quoted statements made by Boat Hauling Inc. followed by the real truth and facts.

Statement (1)….” He also neglects to write that he has sent me threatening emails (how he received my email address is still beyond me.) Here is part of an email he sent to me:”

TRUTH (1)….THE STATEMENT ABOVE IS TOTALLY FALSE. THE FIRST EMAIL EXCHANGE WAS INTITIATED BY THE PERSON CLAIMING TO BE THE OWNER OF BOAT HAULERS INC UNDER THE NAME OF Angela Kay Sauer…aka Angie Sauer…..aka Angie Barrone….aka Angela Householder….aka Angela Kay Barrone. How or where she obtained my email address is unimportant, however her false claim that I started it by sending her threatening emails is a complete lie. The first email exchange is presented below and it clearly is a threatening email from Angela (claiming to be Angela Sauer) at that time. I especially enjoyed Angela’s statement saying………

Statement (2)…. “You have no idea who you are dealing with.”

TRUTH (2)…..WRONG AGAIN….Because indeed I do know who I’m dealing with and who she (Angela) was, and now claim’s to be. The facts are that she is Angela Kay Barrone, the wife of Todd Bentley Barrone, a purportedly ordained minister and registered owner of True Faith Ministries (a Nevada based wedding mill) and Grail Enterprises (another Nevada based company) associated directly with True Faith Ministries. This is all a matter of public record. I obtained documented proof of her (Angela Householder) marriage to Todd Barrone from Nevada state marriage records. Her given name at the time of the marriage was Angela Householder.

She was Angela Sauer prior to that. That fact is also substantiated by conversations with her blood relatives, and again, documented proof was obtained from various sources of public information including Angela’s family tree, her immediate family’s own website, and Missouri & Nevada state records.

Indisputable evidence that she and/or Todd Barrone are the registered owners of both Red Sea Solutions and The Wize Guyz (also used as multiple IDs on uShip along with Boat Hauling INC.) is recorded in the Missouri registration of fictitious names for company DBAs conducting business as Missouri based companies. Those are the two companies that she vehemently denies any knowledge of or relationship to; in the email below…..Missouri Secretary of State records unequivocally dispute her claim and absolutely proves her statement is a lie.

(3)…. “There was a miscommunication as far as Apache Transport which has since been straightened out as I stated it would in my communication.”

TRUTH (3) AGAIN….A TOTAL LIE STATING THERE WAS A MISCOMMUNICATION AS FAR AS APACHE TRANSPORT AND THE FALSE CLAIM OF BOAT HAULING INC’S AFFILIATION WITH APACHE TRANSPORT…. Immediately after Boat Hauling Inc. posted that false claim in the uShip Q & A, I contacted the owner (Mr. Kroniak) of Apache Transport. The owner stated emphatically there was no affiliation between his company and Boat Hauling Inc. THERE WAS NO MISCOMMUNICATION…At that point, Boat Hauling Inc. was caught “red handed” attempting to use a legal motor carrier’s credentials without permission and now was attempting to cover it up presumably to remain active on uShip. Subsequently, the real owner of those credentials contacted uShip with the facts……”Boat Hauling INC. was not authorized to use Apache Transport’s carrier authority. I have emails from both the real owner of Apache Transport and uShip management that substantiates those facts.

The result is that Boat Hauling Inc. is now suspended from uShip.

Boat Hauling Inc.

http://www.uship.com/profile/boathaulinginc/

Red Sea Solutions (aka Wize Guyz) profile remains on uShip and all activity is closely monitored by “Stop Illegal Truckers” and other Consumer Advocate groups.

Statement (4)…. “That being said, if you send me any more threatening emails or post any more false information about me or my company, Boat Hauling INC. I will seek legal action against you for:

Harrassment

Deflammation of Character

Verbal Assault”

TRUTH (4)….NOW THIS I DO NOT CLAIM TO BE A FALSE STATEMENT, JUST AN EMPTY AND BASELESS THREAT. Documented facts substantiate every comment I’ve made. This is one threat I’d really like to see her (or him) pursue. I have more than sufficient documented factual information to prove she is a liar and attempted to illegally use another carrier’s credentials. The only reason I have not filed civil action against Angela and Todd Barrone is that they don’t have any assets. I have documentation of their pathetic financial situation from records where they sold their house in Las Vegas…and for a substantial loss according to public records. Additionally, I have proof of creditors attempting to collect debts owed by them. And lastly, their desperate and unsuccessful attempts to establish marginally legitimate businesses, mostly involved with near scams.

My objective now is to continue to collect documentation to assist the appropriate authorities to seek criminal charges against both Angela K. and Todd B. Barrone. To this end, I will continue to work with law enforcement and other organizations including consumer advocate groups.

Statement (5)…. “I feel the only reason that you are emailing this nasty and distasteful (not to mention defammatory)garbage to me is that you are obviously extremely upset by your current financial hardships due to the economy. I suggest you seek help for your obvious anger issues.”

TRUTH (5)…FIRST OF ALL, I COULDN’T CARE LESS WHAT SHE (OR HE) FEELS….I would further doubt she (or he) has any knowledge of my personal “current financial hardships” since, unlike them, I have none. I can assure them that I have ample financial resources to be comfortable and adequate resources and influential contacts to continue to pursue justice. My hope is that it results in appropriate punishment for them, as determined by a court of law.

I also could not care less about their concern about alleged “obvious anger issues”. The truth is that it does anger me when I observe unethical, immoral, and dishonest scum, with their shady schemes and scams, trying to take advantage of honest and innocent people. I don’t need “help” with it since it isn’t a problem….I simply turn it into determination to seek justice.

Statement (6)… My name is Angela Sauer, I am the owner of Boat Hauling INC. I do not have any affiliation with any of the companies that you have named here in your email. I do have a working relationship with Apache Transport. I am sorry that you feel that you are above the reaches of human nature, however, this was nothing more then a mis communication gone too far.

TRUTH (6)… THAT’S A LIE….You are Angela Barrone…..married to Todd Barrone. Your names appear as owners/officers of both those companies you claim no affiliation with or knowledge about. You do NOT have a working relationship with Apache Transport and the owner denies your affiliation and claim to be authorized to operate under his motor carrier authority. There was no “miscommunication”, stating that was only a desperate attempt on your part to prevent uShip from suspending you from the website. You were caught and that didn’t work either.

Respond to this report!

What’s this?

#3 Consumer Suggestion

UShip

AUTHOR: Tracey – (USA)

SUBMITTED: Friday, October 09, 2009

There are extremely good detailed articles and “comments” about Uship at the links below. Actually, they are good for any shipping that a person is considering having done, especially through the intenet. The links are very educational.

http://marketplace.publicradio.org/d…online-movers/

http://www.examiner.com/x-5187-Movin…e-safe–Part-I

http://www.examiner.com/x-5187-Movin…-safe–Part-II

http://www.examiner.com/x-5187-Movin…safe–Part-III

http://www.examiner.com/x-5187-Movin…t-IV?#comments

http://reloroundtable.com/blog/?p=3426

Uship’s Top 100 transporters for 2008

http://www.stopillegaltrucking.com/f…php?f=31&t=688

Look at what the state of

California

has to say about UShip and the cautions that need to be exercised.

http://www.asianweek.com/2009/09/18/move-it-dont-lose-it/

FYI: The members of

WWW.StopIllegalTrucking.Com

will help anyone check out a Carrier’s credentials for “legality” of the Carrier absoulutely free!

The

web site

is 100% free and open to to public. Just scan through the forums. No registration required except if you want to post something. Even then, it’s 100% free with no catches/gimmicks. They do this to support their cause.

Here’s the real story. It’s information that you won’t find any other way!

Google

the phrase below:

Uship feedback negative rating After initial results appear, scroll down to where is says: Show more results from www.UShip.Com and click on that. Then scroll down to where it says: Show all results from www.UShip.Com and click on that.

Respond to this report!

What’s this?

#4 Consumer Comment

semo trucking aka 1meandog aka donald sifford

AUTHOR: trucker101 – orlando (United States of America)

SUBMITTED: Wednesday, December 30, 2009

I see this guy writing about being legal and following the rules well, 1meandog aka donald sifford from MO sets up fake uship accounts to run his security guard games on uship. he post fake loads to “catch people” this guy does not even haul anymore he uses a fake sign in from ct to hide behind when he post things, he also bashes uship for no reason I will be sending this info to uship I hope they suspend your account. dont give this guy any credit he’s the school yard bully.

Respond to this report!

What’s this?

#5 Consumer Comment

Same Old Story

AUTHOR: WorstNightmare – (USA)

SUBMITTED: Tuesday, September 06, 2011

This jackoof is on uship blogs belly aching about brokers and carriers. Does this guy have nothing better to do with his life? Oh wait, he is from CT! That explains it all.

Respond to this report!

What’s this?

#6 Consumer Comment

U-Ship is a total scam and ripoff.

AUTHOR: WorstNightmare – (USA)

SUBMITTED: Thursday, November 17, 2011

Uship has gone well over the line this time. Matt thinks he is slick but I am quite certain that there is a group of us that is going to bring his enterprise down. He is on a sinking ship and does not even realize it. The uship payments was the last straw for many of us providers. U-Ships fee’s are off the charts! I can say one thing positive about belonging to U-Ship: I did aquire many of loyal customers who call me directly now instead of using U-Ships ponzi-scheme… Many Thanks U-Ship. I will still be in business long after you are bankrupt and sitting in prison.

I’m glad uShip has this show. It proves they allow ignorant scammers on their site and the negative publicity for the stupid show is better than anything posted about the scams. It so backfired on them and I am sure you will start to hear rumors about investigations.

The first customer was not home with the payment code and had to contact her father to meet me with the code. As English was not their first language it was a impossible dilemma.

On the second delivery their printer was not working as I just delivered their goods and it was still in a box so, I could not get a hard copy of the payment code and took a chance that it was correct. “Just as good as cash” was what a uship employee told me last year when you rolled out this program. I was suspended for my response to this and other uninformed statements. It was difficult for me to fund this whole move from pick up through delivery . In the past I received half cash at pick up and balance at delivery. That allowed for paying cost on the road like fuel,motel,wages,food etc. Now I had to front all these expenses until I received the payment code. Then there was the delay until the funds were available in my checking account. I am very worried about the safety of my account information in the hands of uship. If you are hacked my account can be drained. Since the US government is constantly hacked I don’t see how uship won’t be.

I used to do two to four thousand a month and was very happy. Now I can’t see being able to afford to do uship jobs unless I can supplement with jobs from former customer,craigslist,angies,etc. I know uship censors the truth but, You must hear it.

Roy Maxson

AMOVER

Love the posts on this page.