Tri-State Miss Understood

[beachbum]

If the company is self insured there would be no deductible on an at fault accident unless you signed a contract that says there is a deductible.. I've never seen a contract that has one in it in over 25 years. This must be something new. I know there's a deductible for pays damage insurance or cargo but not liability since by FMCSA regs has to be supplied by the company.

 

[wvcourier]

If the company is self insured there would be no deductible on an at fault accident unless you signed a contract that says there is a deductible.. I've never seen a contract that has one in it in over 25 years. This must be something new. I know there's a deductible for pays damage insurance or cargo but not liability since by FMCSA regs has to be supplied by the company.

Yeah, something isnt adding up, i wish i still had my contract," or read it more carefully" but i know for a fact the Cargo wasnt damaged. And nobody called and let me know anything, or sais anything when i terminated my lease, all i see is a New "deduction".

 

[Turtle]

Yeah, something isnt adding up, i wish i still had my contract," or read it more carefully" but i know for a fact the Cargo wasnt damaged. And nobody called and let me know anything, or sais anything when i terminated my lease, all i see is a New "deduction".

Do you keep telling us the cargo wasn't damaged because you think cargo insurance was somehow involved? If the cargo wasn't damaged, then a claim for cargo damage wasn't filed, and the deduction wasn't for cargo damage. Just because "cargo" is listed on the settlement deduction as part of that deduction line doesn't mean the deduction was for cargo damage. They have the one line in the computer where they record insurance deductions, whether it be for vehicle accident, or a cargo accident. That's why the /slash/ is there, to denote "OR." Since the cargo wasn't damaged, and no cargo damage claim was filed, you should concentrate on the "Accident" part of the deduction.

The slash ( / ), also known as the virgule, has several uses, most often used to mean "and" (he has cargo/physical damage insurance) or "or" (he had an accident/cargo damage deduction) and sometimes "per" (he pays $30/week for the QC).

In any case, it shouldn't be all that hard to find out from Tri State precisely what the $102.89 deduction is for. You might even find out it was a mistake and they'll give it back. Won't know until you ask.

 

[Ragman]

Maybe you dont understand my Grievance.

No, we don't understand.

 

[mjmsprt40]

You rear-ended another vehicle and somehow expected that Tri-State was just gonna write off the charges??

The story changes each time too--- so I begin to think there's a trifle more than we know so far. I'd be interested to hear Tri-State's side of the story.

Example of change: It goes from "No injuries/no damage" to "Neck sprain/bumper fell off". Now, that's quite a stiff change--- and when insurance and lawyers are involved it's a HUGE change. It takes a fair-sized wallop to make a bumper fall off, and that size wallop is likely to cause significant damage to the person in the car that was hit.

Somehow I'm left wanting to hear the other side of this story.

 

[Turtle]

Well, he didn't say her bumper actually fell off.

"So i guess her neck started hurting afterward, or her bumper fell off afterward idk."

I'm assuming "idk" stands for "I don't know." He was speculating as to what might have happened, since there was no damage (even though a police report was created) and no one was hurt (that he knew of)

 

[wvcourier]

You rear-ended another vehicle and somehow expected that Tri-State was just gonna write off the charges??

The story changes each time too--- so I begin to think there's a trifle more than we know so far. I'd be interested to hear Tri-State's side of the story.

Example of change: It goes from "No injuries/no damage" to "Neck sprain/bumper fell off". Now, that's quite a stiff change--- and when insurance and lawyers are involved it's a HUGE change. It takes a fair-sized wallop to make a bumper fall off, and that size wallop is likely to cause significant damage to the person in the car that was hit.

Somehow I'm left wanting to hear the other side of this story.

.........There was no "wallop" or anytype of injuries,(unless she went to family Dr.after)or damage(that me or the police saw) otherwise the police would have issued a ticket. Idk what happened after i turned in camera and police report to Tri State, never heard anything until i got my last settlement and seen this Deduction, i wasnt notified about anything, because Tri State dosent think like that, they think only about Deductions, and only Deduction. They make so much money off of thier Deductions , it part of their business model, Deduction here a deduction there, . ......and no one expects anyone to write anything off, but if they made a settlement without my knowledge or input , regardless of whats in contract, they should have At The Least, notifified myself, let me know what happened, and why they settled, and why they were taking Deduction, and to expect a Deduction. But they withheld this information for some reason, either on purpose, bc i terminated contract, or out of spite, bc i had the audacity to complain last week about 300 in escrow that for some reason couldn't be used for the QC removal, or they just dont care, just another dime a dozen C/V driver, dosent even own a Sprinter, so who cares.

 

[RoadTime]

Maybe you dont understand my Grievance.

So this thread is about a $100 that you thought you were getting. Until a "surprise deduction" after an accident you had took the last of a one week, one run, short trip, that was most likely in your contract that you didn't read or have. And they are crooks because for your negligence? Am I missing something

 

[wvcourier]

So this thread is about a $100 that you thought you were getting. Until a "surprise deduction" after an accident you had took the last of a one week, one run, short trip, that was most likely in your contract that you didn't read or have. And they are crooks because for your negligence? Am I missing something

Obviously...and can one of moderators change Thread from "Tri-State Crooks" (that isnt fair or accurate. ..crooks are people like John Petrus)to "Tri-State Deductions" and i wish i was doing as good as some of rest of you, to think of $100 as mere pocket change.

 

[cheri1122]

sorry be so blunt, but i have thousands on reserve, and i have those reserves bc i dont DH home when im 500 miles away.( so just because i budgeted this 100 ,and expected to use it to get home, dosent make me a bad expediter) I made business decision to cut ties,with Tri State, and thier latest Deduction and complete disregard, and unconcern(maybe 100 dollars growz on treez for you and Tri State, but not me or probably any other profitable O/O expediter)only proves i made a good business decision.

Yet another contradiction: in an earlier post, you were complaining that they took your "last two checks, wen [sic] I needed it most, wen I have bills to pay". Now, you have "thousands in reserve"?
And you shouldn't be surprised that they kept your escrow, ["until July, WTF?"] because they always keep it for 30-45 days after termination, just in case of unexpected claims arising. With an accident just prior to termination, claims might not be exactly unexpected, on their part. No matter how sure you are that the cargo wasn't damaged, the customer might feel otherwise, you can't be sure. And the uninjured person in the vehicle you 'bumped' may find an injury that wasn't apparent right away - it happens.
I can't see where you have any reasonable grounds for complaint whatsoever.

 

[wvcourier]

I know for a fact the cargo wasnt damaged. And accident was 2 months ago, and might have exaggerated about "thousands in reserve" but i have reserves and could have used those reserves, but then id be minus 200 instead of 100, not a wise business decision. And i do have bills to pay. And do not use reserves to pay bills. Thats emergency/Sprinter fund.

 

[Turtle]

You do realize that unless the contract specifically states that the escrow money can be used for QC removal, then it can't be used for that, right? Escrow money can only be used for certain, specific things and nothing else.

 

[Unclebob]

Keep in mind that even a tiny amount of damage to the other vehicle could cost thousands to repair. A small scuff mark, scratch or other damage would be easy to miss during the confusion of the accident. The energy absorbing bumper parts may have needed replaced. There are multiple possibilities.

For small damage amounts your insurance will just pay for the repair and not fight it, and of course your deductible WILL apply. Same case with Tri-State being self insured.

Too keep this from happening again keep assured clear distance and pay attention.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[jelliott]

I don't think any of the major expedite companies are fully self insured. Even large ones that are in captives still have deductibles for the most part. Being completely self insured on auto liability is VERY difficult and overly burdensome with regulation. What you generally find is very large deductible coverages as the carrier is financially structured to handle and maintains retention with the insurance provider and the carrier maintains all legal filings and claim management. Other than physical damage insurance, this is only required or not required by whoever is financing the equipment and does not require federal filings. Even if a carrier is self insured or large deductible (which can be hundreds of thousands of dollars), a claim is still not "free" as is kind of inferred here.

 

[Unclebob]

I did not intend it to sound as if it was "free". In fact just the opposite, the person at fault is responsible for the deductible portion of their insurance.

 

[xiggi]

I did not intend it to sound as if it was "free". In fact just the opposite, the person at fault is responsible for the deductible portion of their insurance.

Actually with the policies used today by many carriers you pay a deductible when there is no fault.

 

[xiggi]

The op keeps stating "all ts cares about is deductions" there is zero proof of this. I would imagine as many drivers that have worked for them we would see this posted hear much more often.

 

[mjmsprt40]

I still would like to hear TS's side of the story.

One thing about it, if somebody came in here with a beef about Load One we would hear within hours from JElliott or his spokesman, and so get at least as much of the complete story as the combatants are legally able to say (once it goes to court, lawyers say silence is golden-- anything said can be taken out of context, twisted and used against you.)

 

[Moot]

You do realize that unless the contract specifically states that the escrow money can be used for QC removal, then it can't be used for that, right? Escrow money can only be used for certain, specific things and nothing else.

I don't know how Tri-State's contract reads. But if deductions or monies owed to Tri-State exceeded the amount of his last settlement then the difference would come out of escrow. That's why carriers require escrow accounts. My guess is he terminated his contract sometime after his last settlement without hauling a load in between.