Victims Find Unscrupulous Movers Take Them for a Ride

California Van Lines is the long-distance mover to the stars. On the firm’s snazzy Web site, testimonials from celebrities such as Ed McMahon and actor Randy Quaid extol its incomparable service.

The problem is, spokesmen for the stars say the endorsements are fakes.

But more than 90 real-life testimonials have turned up in the files of the Better Business Bureau and other agencies over the last three years. These are complaints from customers who said the Los Angeles-based firm either overcharged them, delivered their goods days or weeks late, or lost or damaged prized possessions--then did not pay their claims.

There are many reputable interstate movers, but also plenty that abuse consumers in the most brazen ways, yet carry on with minimal interference. That’s because regulatory oversight is almost nonexistent, and victims of unscrupulous movers have no recourse. The problem has been highlighted in recent years in hearings before Congress, but experts say almost nothing has been done.

Waseem Choudhry’s moving experience began in late May. Lured by the promise of a “half-price special,” he hired California Van Lines to move him from Anaheim to Maryland. But once his goods were on the truck, Choudhry said, he was told to approve extra charges on his credit card or “you will not get your things.”

Choudhry said his belongings arrived three weeks late. While waiting, he and his wife--then six months pregnant--slept on the floor. He said the movers would not unload the items until he paid double the estimate, then he discovered they had lost his bed and left him someone else’s mattress. Choudhry said that when he tried to file a claim for missing items, the firm would not return his calls.

It turns out that more than a month before Choudhry hired the mover, federal authorities had revoked its operating authority because its insurance had been canceled. Nonetheless, the firm has not shut down.

Representatives of California Van Lines said they are operating legally, and one said that although he did not know the specifics of Choudhry’s case, the company would not have hiked his bill unless his goods weighed more than the estimate.

“We’ve done everything ... by the book,” said Brian Ewell, president and owner of California Van Lines. “We have done a lot of business, ... and yes, over the years you will have a couple of customers that you will drop the ball on. You try to do the best you can to make it right.”

The long list of bitter clients has not led to regulatory action against California Van Lines.

In an industry plagued by rogue operators, a mover can attract carloads of complaints without drawing scrutiny. Even the American Moving and Storage Assn., a trade group, acknowledges that it’s not just a problem of a few bad apples.

“There are a lot of what we call ‘scam movers’ out there that we would dearly love to see driven out of the business,” said David Sparkman, spokesman for the group. “It really is a situation of caveat emptor, of buyer beware.”

Critics put the blame on a regulatory Catch-22. Under U.S. law, authority over interstate movers rests with the federal government, tying the hands of the states.

However, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, the branch of the Transportation Department that is supposed to ride herd on movers, acknowledges making very little effort. Agency officials say they can’t afford to divert staff from their main mission: reducing casualties from truck and bus wrecks.

A Regulation Vacuum

The result is “a vacuum that has allowed unscrupulous carriers to flourish and take advantage of consumers,” the General Accounting Office said last year in a highly critical report. Dishonest movers “are aware that the department does little to enforce the consumer protection regulations, or provide much oversight of the industry,” the GAO said.

Compounding the problem is the extraordinary leverage movers have while in control of their customers’ belongings.

“Once your belongings are out of your possession--if you’re not dealing with somebody reputable--you’re in jeopardy of losing everything,” said David Longo, spokesman for the motor carrier agency.

For many victims, their ordeal begins with a low-ball estimate that the mover has no intention of honoring. The customer’s belongings may be held hostage until hundreds or thousands of extra dollars are paid. It’s illegal for movers to demand more than 10% above the estimate to release a customer’s goods, but many flout the rule with impunity.

Many recalcitrant movers also refuse to resolve or arbitrate claims for lost or damaged goods, as federal rules require.

Complicating the task of choosing a reputable mover, sometimes the company hired for a job arranges for a second firm to do the pickup and a third to transport the goods. Renegade operators also use multiple names to hide their tracks, or shut down and reopen under a new name.

Although abusive practices occur nationwide, the New York-to-Florida corridor has been the main hotbed of scamming firms.

Rip-offs also occur in intrastate moves. But on the long-distance side, authorities say, the clamor for less government has made things worse.

No More ‘Nannies’

Until it was dissolved by Congress in 1995, the Interstate Commerce Commission was assigned to regulate movers and devoted as many as 50 members of its staff to consumer complaints. Though taking few enforcement actions, the agency often was able to jawbone movers into resolving complaints.

After the demise of the ICC, the job was reassigned to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration. But Congress directed that federal officials no longer intercede for consumers.

This was considered “a nanny function,” recalled Linda Morgan, a former ICC chairman and now head of the federal Surface Transportation Board. The thinking was that “government shouldn’t be in the business of holding people’s hands.”

Only three members on the motor carrier agency’s 760-person staff are working full time in household goods. Since Sept. 11, the agency has new responsibilities for the security of hazardous shipments, so the situation isn’t likely to change.

The agency maintains a hotline that annually logs as many as 4,000 household-goods complaints, but there is little follow-up.

“There’s more of them [scamming movers] than there are of us, and they know that,” Longo said.

The agency and DOT’s office of inspector general have taken action in about two dozen of the most egregious cases--imposing civil penalties or injunctions and sending several corrupt movers to jail.

Yet wronged consumers usually have no recourse. Though Congress declared that they could pursue their grievances through arbitration or lawsuits, neither has proved a viable option.

Federal regulations require movers to accept binding arbitration for claims of as much as $5,000, but many companies ignore the rule. And because interstate carriers enjoy broad legal immunity, the cost of suing them can exceed the damages that might be won.

A nearly century-old law known as the Carmack Amendment holds that carriers can be held responsible only for the value of lost or damaged goods. Claims for negligence or misrepresentation, which might bring a sizable damage award, are barred.

“When Congress was looking at all this, I don’t think they really understood” that consumers might have “no place to go if they are getting ripped off,” Morgan said.

Critics have called on Congress to unshackle the states by giving them permission to pursue interstate movers under state consumer protection laws. At the very least, they say, states should have the option of enforcing the federal regulations, because the motor carrier agency does not.

The American Moving and Storage Assn., though acknowledging the problem, has weighed in against these proposals. They “would result in an inconsistent interpretation all over the country of what the federal regulations are,” said Sparkman, the group’s spokesman.

Left for now to fend for themselves, irate consumers share horror stories online at Web sites such as www.ripoffreport.com and www.movingadvocateteam.com.

The latter site, created by Florida resident James Balderamma after a bad experience, includes a blacklist nominated by furious customers.

“We flat out tell people, ‘Do not ... use these movers,’ ” Balderamma said. “There is literally nothing you can do to stop them from ripping you off.... They know there’s zero enforcement.”

By contrast, the Web site of California Van Lines boasts moving excellence.

According to quotations that have appeared on the site, McMahon and Quaid were blown away by the service they received. So were “Gina Davis, Actress”--the film star’s first name is Geena--and “Cheryl Crow, Recording Artist,” who spells her name “Sheryl.”

McMahon, Quaid and Davis said through spokesmen that the endorsements were phony. Crow’s publicist failed to return phone calls.

Ewell said California Van Lines did move the celebrities and received their endorsements, but he was unable to provide documentation.

After inquiries by The Times, a lawyer for Quaid demanded that his name be removed, and California Van Lines complied. His alleged quotation still appears, but instead of “Randy Quaid, Actor,” the exact words are attributed to “Milano Mellon, MD.”

Authority Revoked

The site also says California Van Lines is “fully licensed and insured.” But on April 16, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration revoked the firm’s authority to operate as an interstate mover, because its insurance carrier had canceled its coverage. Longo, the federal agency’s spokesman, said it’s illegal for carriers whose authority has been revoked to haul household goods, but he acknowledged that the agency did not follow up to check on the company’s status.

California Van Lines has continued to sign up customers. Company representatives said this is legal, because since April they have acted as booking agents for movers that actually haul the loads.

However, some customers--including Choudhry and Zhanna Osminina--who hired California Van Lines after April 16 told The Times that the firm had hauled their goods.

In May, Osminina hired Nationwide Relocation Services, a broker, to coordinate her move from Maryland to Los Angeles. Nationwide sent All Points Moving & Storage to pick up her things. After Osminina’s goods were in transit, she learned they had been transferred to California Van Lines.

Osminina arrived at her apartment in Los Feliz and waited, without a bed to sleep in, or the clothes she needed to apply for a job.

Osminina said the truck showed up 10 days after the deadline promised in her contract. She said the movers would not unload until she paid nearly $800 more than her estimate. She said a computer desk and other things had been broken and six boxes of clothing and other items had been lost.

But Osminina and other former customers interviewed by The Times said that what distressed them most was the disregard they said they were shown when they inquired about their overdue shipments. They recalled representatives of the mover telling different stories every day and being put on hold for as long as 20 minutes.

The company’s general manager, who identified himself as Gary Johnson, said customers are put on hold--but only because “we’re very popular.”

Ewell said the firm gets many referrals from old customers, so it must be doing something right. “You’re writing about the wrong company,” he said, “because we do everything ... by the book.”