Previously in this package: Criticism mounts of DataQs crash/inspection-info review system
Among the crash-related DataQs reviews in 2019, almost half were attempts to correct data about the carrier involved, or in some cases that was mistakenly said to be involved. Some problems stem from simple errors in recording or transferring the data. Others can be more complex. Any error can cause serious, sometimes lasting problems with safety ratings and then related issues, such as insurance coverage and premiums.
One way erroneous carrier information enters into accident and violation reports is when an owner-operator departs a fleet on bad terms while on the road. If the owner never bothers to get the fleet’s DOT number removed from his truck and has a wreck, it can mean going down an expensive, lengthy paper trail to get it fixed, said Christopher Haney, director of safety and human resources for Payne Trucking, a 130-truck fleet based in Fredericksburg, Virginia.
“All of a sudden I get an accident report through CSA,” he said. “So now I have to go in, produce a phenomenal amount of documentation to show this driver is no longer affiliated with our company.”
In a 2019 case, Haney did just that and won the appeal. “But I have colleagues who’ve had similar problems and were told there was nothing they could do about it,” he said. When such a case advances to a lawsuit, “I now have to defend it. I’ve got to hire counsel. That can cost tens of thousands of dollars, up to six figures, to prove I’ve done nothing wrong.”
Payne Trucking, based in Fredericksburg, Virginia, has been careful to use DataQs only when there is compelling evidence to submit, said Christopher Haney, director of safety and human resources. He said he’s had a perfect record in successful DataQs submissions.
