TruckDisp Freight Documentation & Accessorials Flashcards

A carrier delivers a shipment and the consignee signs the POD but writes 'subject to inspection' without noting any visible damage. Three days later, the consignee files a freight claim for concealed damage. Which statement BEST describes the legal standing of this claim?

Answer: The claim is likely valid because 'subject to inspection' notation preserves the consignee's right to file for concealed damage discovered within a reasonable time.

Under the Carmack Amendment, 'subject to inspection' notations on a POD preserve the consignee's right to file concealed damage claims. Concealed damage—damage not visible at delivery—is legally distinguishable from visible damage and does not require a POD notation to support a valid claim, provided it is reported within the standard 9-month filing window. Courts have consistently held that a clean POD does not bar concealed damage claims when proper notification follows promptly.

A flatbed load departs with a straight Bill of Lading. En route, the shipper contacts the dispatcher and issues a 'shipper's order' to divert the load to a different consignee. Which document type MUST be used to make this diversion legally enforceable and negotiable?

Answer: An Order Bill of Lading (negotiable BOL) endorsed by the shipper

An Order Bill of Lading (negotiable BOL) is the only instrument that grants the shipper the legal right to divert or redirect a shipment mid-transit by endorsement. A straight BOL is non-negotiable and names a fixed consignee—it cannot be diverted without mutual agreement and creates legal complications. The Order BOL, made out 'to the order of' the shipper, is the cornerstone of diversion rights and is routinely used in grain, produce, and commodity trades where end-buyers aren't finalized at origin.

A dispatcher books a reefer load of pharmaceuticals. The carrier arrives 2 hours late to the shipper, causing a 3-hour detention wait. The shipper then delays loading an additional 2 hours due to a dock labor issue. When calculating billable detention, which hours are assessable against the shipper?

Answer: Only the hours that exceed the free-time allowance after the carrier's scheduled appointment time, excluding the carrier's own late arrival period

Detention clocks are calculated from the carrier's scheduled appointment time, not actual arrival. Because the carrier arrived 2 hours late, those 2 hours are the carrier's fault and are not billable. The detention clock effectively starts at the appointment time—meaning the carrier had already 'used' 2 hours of free time before even arriving. Detention begins accruing against the shipper only after the standard free time (typically 2 hours) has elapsed from the appointment time. In this scenario, the shipper's 2-hour dock labor delay may be partially billable depending on remaining free time, but the carrier's late arrival is never a billable component.

A hazardous materials shipment is moving under a Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest. The driver loses the manifest en route. Under DOT regulations, what is the CORRECT immediate course of action?

Answer: The driver must contact the dispatcher, who contacts the shipper to fax or electronically transmit a copy; movement may continue only with a copy in possession

Under 49 CFR and EPA regulations governing Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifests, the driver must have a manifest copy accompanying the shipment at all times. If the original is lost, the dispatcher coordinates with the shipper to provide a reproduced copy (fax or electronic transmission is acceptable in most states under RCRA provisions). Movement may continue with the copy while the missing original is reported. Returning to origin is not required. The dispatcher's role here is critical: coordinating document retrieval in real time to maintain regulatory compliance and avoid a moving violation.

A shipper tenders a load and the broker's rate confirmation specifies 'all-in' pricing with no accessorials. The carrier encounters a scale ticket showing the load is 2,400 lbs over the legal axle limit and must scale down at a certified facility. Who bears the cost of the scale-down and redelivery of the excess freight?

Answer: The shipper, because tendering an overweight load is a shipper error and the resulting costs—including scale fees and redelivery—are their liability

When a shipper tenders freight that exceeds legal weight limits, the error originates with the shipper's loading and documentation practices. 'All-in' pricing on a rate confirmation covers anticipated costs of the contracted move—not costs arising from shipper negligence. The shipper is liable for scale fees, storage at the weigh station, redelivery of excess freight, and any fines incurred by the carrier. The carrier should document everything, obtain itemized receipts, and bill the shipper through the broker. Dispatchers must be proactive in reminding shippers of axle weight limits and recommending certified scale stops before departure when loads are near limits.

A carrier completes a delivery and submits a freight invoice with a TONU (Truck Order Not Used) charge. The broker disputes it, claiming the load was never formally cancelled—the carrier just 'failed to show.' Which documentation is MOST critical for the carrier to enforce the TONU charge?

Answer: A signed rate confirmation showing the load was booked, plus timestamped carrier communications showing they were ready and able to load when the cancellation occurred

A TONU charge is enforced when a carrier is dispatched, commits resources, and the load is cancelled after a defined point—typically after the carrier is en route or within a set timeframe of pickup. To prevail in a TONU dispute, the carrier needs: (1) a signed rate confirmation establishing the contract, (2) timestamped communications (macro messages, emails, calls) showing the carrier was deployed and operationally committed, and (3) evidence of the cancellation or no-show condition from the shipper/broker side. A driver's statement alone is insufficient. Shipper written acknowledgment is ideal but not the only path—carrier-side records can establish TONU entitlement even without shipper admission.