Holland Enterprises - Denzie Edie ripoff Falsely Misrepresented USIS DAC Regarding My Employment with their Company Mapleton North Dakota

Don't believe anything that lieing b . Say's on here she is a low life (denzil edie) lover fan.You can read orientation twice, aka puffkitty.On here and at the truckersreport.To read all of her low life (denzil edie) lies.She does not care about what low life (denzil edie )say's about the professional otr driver's.To dac(hireright).

This is to orientation twice.Get our facts straight and right first before you make a fool of yourself on the ripoff report.oh to late you done did.lol.Orientation  twice.wrong fact 1.you said in may 2009. My Right fact 1.I never said anything about  the year 2009.I was their in feb of 2007 and submitted my true report to the ripoff report in march 2007. Orientation twice wrong fact 2.you said  in may 2009 you doubt that there was 4 trucks  that were 2000 &2002. My right fact 2 .I said 35 new trucks in 2007,available that ken and (low life denzil edie) told us 4 new drivers.which if you would have read it right said after the last day of orientation,(low life denzil edie) lied to us 4 drivers and said no new trucks to put us in.I said 3 of us drivers get 2000s that's with a (s) which i know i get a 2000 cause i say it,but i dont know if the other 2 drivers semi is a 2000 or 2001,the other driver gets a 2002 just like i said ,dumb a**.orientation.lol..Orientation twice wrong fact 3.As far as bob-tailing never heard of dispatch in over a year telling a driver to do that. My Right fact 3. I took the load to the consignee and was told by consignee to unhook and they would unload by consignee, I never said anthing about dispatch telling me to bob tail down to the truck stop!Anyone can tell that orientation twice is either a real dumb ass or a very good liar. Or both ,orientation twice is ,Author  a driver's wife, She's trying to say she was in orientation twice with her husband twice,she must have been up( low life denzil edie )and her husband's ass 24 -7 to know all of their so called holland orientation twice. B.S.lol.team driver not!What's really bad is orientation twice submitted report is jan 2010 3 years later after my submitted report.later.Such Bull S..t.lol.

I was their in feb 2007 and i was put in a 2000 .I know i went over the semi.So don't try to tell me what i was in.Or think i did not get a 2000.And low life denzie and dispatch both told me on the phone before i even left illinois to even go to nd.that they would get me home after orientation.to get my personal things.So i didn't get to go back home so that does mean that low life denzie and dispatch did lie to me.So my story is the truth.not yours.And trying to send me to los angeles california is no way going in the way back to illinois.Period!I was told by consignee to drop trailer and was not going to get unloaded by my 10 hr.break was up no other empty trailers on the lot.so i guess orientation twice.and ever believe everything you read but.would have  stayed on a gravel parking lot with no food or water or bathroom.yeah right!And why did  you go thru orientation twice?

you said it like it is. Denzil and the company have a very dark side. but the money and the miles were good but not any more they went to the short runs 500 to 600 mile runs and unless your nose is always in the right spot they will shoot you a long run only after your sick on the short ones  so the 1500 miles average is B.S unless you think like Denzil 3 500miles run average out to 1500 mile load I had Denzil explain that to me. and its true about the rest you reported about the lies and threats about on your Dac he did it to me but I have to thank Denzil for being a low life that he is. it saved my life if he would not have lied on my Dac and made it hard to find a job I would have never have  took the time to get a check up and find out I had som e real bad medical problems so thanks Denzil for being low life that you are it worked out for me but I warn every one else to watch your back at Holland

dont believe everything you read or hear... common sense.. BUT  I have also been in orientation twice with Denzil......  Denzil has a very dark side, unfortunately so do the Hollands.... I get along with all the office people, except richard   in the shop.....  I have seen this behavior with the DAC. Also Denzil always says he tells it like it is........  1 out of 3words out of his mouth is alie...  One fact is, there are more miles at holland than many companies  BUT if you have even the smallest issue with anything,  you will take the HEAT.  Holland is never wrong and Holland will tell you how lucky you are to even work for them.......  In 2008 there were still 2000 and 2001 and 2002 and 2003  trucks....... they kept them for the fuel economy.......  there now sold to owner ops.  and Great plains purchased the rest of them because they were getting well over 7MPG.  So please,  before you defend Holland,  you need to get 100% of your facts straight..  Holland does also promise you to be at your front door within 7-10days after you start.. also Holland does not tell you about  E-LOGS until after you arrive there........  I have been talking to many of the new hires and I keep hearing the same thing over and over again........  I dont believe they all would hold the same story if there was no truth in this.......  THANK YOU......  ALMOST 3 YEAR COMPANY DRIVER... trying to keep it real 4 you...

I have been through orientation twice with Holland Ent. Denzil has the same spill and never makes promises about trucks or home time. They try to get you home if you need your stuff but anybody who is a truck driver knows it might take a few days, they dont always have loads to your front door. In May 2009 I doubt that there was 4 trucks that were 2000 &2002 models my Husband started at the end of 08 and was in an 07 or 06 for a couple of weeks and moved into an 08  Denzil Eddie is a fair man and tells you like it is, but this "complaint" is nothing like what would ever be said by him. As far as the bobtailing, never heard of dispatch in over a year telling any driver to do that, most places you drop a trailer you pick another up. What does a driver expect to have on his DAC if he refuses a load. I have heard Denzil clearly state you adbandon the truck he will do what he can that you have a hard time getting a job.

The poster of the above message is absolutely correct!

I have witnessed Denzil say the very same things to my incoming orientation group - but after making it very clear that the new employee will be sued if they do not reimburse the bus ticket and other expenses incurred by Holland to bring the new driver to Mapleton and begin the new hire process.

DEAR BRAD,

YOUR INFORMATION IS IN FACT TRUE!
NOT ONLY WERE YOU WITH THE GROUP OF 4 WHO WE'RE TOLD THAT YOU WOULD BE SUBJECTED TO REPORTING TO DAC SERVICES-USIS IN ORIENATION.
BUT SO WE'RE WE FIVE (5).
MR. DENZIL EDIE ABSOLUTELY, UNEQUIVOCALLY, DID SAY THIS!

MY ADVICE!
1). IS TO READ THIS ARTICLE
For Immediate Release

Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association
1 NW OOIDA Drive, Grain Valley, MO
E-mail:ooida@ooida.com
Web site: www.ooida.com
Phone: (816) 229-5791
Fax: (816) 427-4468

OOIDA files class action complaint against DAC

July 8, 2004, Grain Valley, MO - The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA) announced today that it has filed a class action suit against USIS Commercial Services Inc., d.b.a. as DAC Services. OOIDA filed the suit along with five of its owner-operator members in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado on behalf of all professional drivers who are now, or may be in the future, the subject of a consumer report published by a motor carrier or by USIS or its predecessor, DAC Services.

In its complaint, OOIDA asserts that USIS (DAC) is a "consumer reporting agency" governed by the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), 5 U.S.C. 1681. Among other things, USIS purchases or otherwise acquires, without the permission of professional truck drivers, statements about them, including statements about their work records, and then sells "consumer reports" containing such statements to other motor carriers considering applications by drivers.

The suit alleges that USIS (DAC) has acquired consumer reports for employment purposes without notice to or permission from the drivers, and failed to satisfy its statutory responsibility as a consumer reporting agency to follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy in the collection and transmission of data through its reports. It has also failed to adopt reasonable procedures to eliminate and correct systematic errors in those communications. The information gathering system established by USIS (DAC) makes no provision for drivers to review or comment on carrier-submitted Termination Record forms or submit rebuttals to such reports before such forms are placed in the USIS database. Typically, drivers learn of the need to take such action only after experiencing adverse action based on a USIS (DAC) Report.

OOIDA and its member plaintiffs are asking the court to declare that certain phrases used in USIS consumer reports are inaccurate and therefore a violation of the FCRA, and to enjoin the use of such statements. It also seeks to enjoin USIS from receiving consumer reports from motor carriers without first providing notice to and obtaining permission from drivers. Finally the suit seeks compensatory and punitive damages for violations of the FCRA and restoration to the class the profits it has generated through both the obtaining of consumer reports and the reporting of inaccurate statements about class members in violation of the FCRA.

OOIDA President Jim Johnston notes the collaboration that his taken place since the mid-1990s between DAC and motor carriers to establish a reporting system of driver work histories that has the potential to discourage and eliminate truck drivers who may be excellent, safe members of the industry, but who may have resisted pressure from the motor carrier to bend the safety laws. Johnston points out these drivers may have insisted in being paid on time, or otherwise attempted to assert his or her rights as an employee or owner-operator under the law.

"For years, OOIDA has received numerous complaints from professional truckers of abuse and intimidation under the DAC system," Johnston said, "especially with regard to the inaccuracy of reports, the ambiguity of the terminology used in the reports and the negative consequences of that coded language."

Specific language that OOIDA is challenging in its complaint includes the phrases "company policy violation," "unsatisfactory safety record," "excessive complaints," "cargo loss," "equipment loss," "quit/dismissed during training/orientation/probation," and "not eligible for rehire."

For example, with regard to "company policy violation" as stated in the complaint, "The phrase fails to denote any policy, generally or specifically, or the date, place or manner of any alleged "violation." The phrase is inherently ambiguous in that company policies vary widely from company to company; within any given company some policies may be lawful and appropriate while others may not; some policies may deal with important matters while others deal with trivial matters; the reader is completely uninformed as to what specific policy was purportedly violated and whether such violation represents relevant information regarding the qualifications of the driver for future employment. But it does have a derogatory connotation. The use of the phrase is equivalent to saying, 'He did something wrong.' Because neither a prospective employer or a driver can know what its author was trying to communicate, the phrase is meaningless, will be used inconsistently, and is therefore 'inaccurate.' "

Johnston said that, as a direct result of this system, many professional truck drivers feel that they have been blackballed, having experienced great difficulty in finding acceptable employment or lease contracts in the industry. "It's time for this unjust system of blackballing and intimidation to come to an end," he said.

USIS Services, which is an Oklahoma-based company, claims to store employment histories for more than 2,500 motor carrier clients - including 95 percent of the largest 100 motor carriers - with access to more than 4.7 million driver records. Its predecessor, DAC Services has been a member of the American Trucking Associations (ATA) since about 1989 and USIS's District of Columbia office was opened in 2002 within the ATA location there.

Contact: Mike Schermoly, OOIDA (816) 229-5791

2). NOTIFY North Dakota Office of Attorney General!
Email: ndag@nd.gov

State Capitol
600 E. Boulevard Ave.
Dept. 125
Bismarck, ND 58505

Consumer Protection and Antitrust
4205 State Street
PO Box 1054
Bismarck ND 58502-1054
701 328-3404
800 472-2600

3). REQUEST ADVICE FROM Legal Services of North Dakota!
Primary Address: PO Box 1893
City: Bismarck
State: ND
Zipcode: 58502
Intake Phone: 800-634-5263
9-3PM

4). GO TO TRUCK DRIVERS UNITED
and Signup and File Your Complaint online under Blacklisted Companies

GOOD LUCK!

DEAR BRAD,

YOUR INFORMATION IS IN FACT TRUE!
NOT ONLY WERE YOU WITH THE GROUP OF 4 WHO WE'RE TOLD THAT YOU WOULD BE SUBJECTED TO REPORTING TO DAC SERVICES-USIS IN ORIENATION.
BUT SO WE'RE WE FIVE (5).
MR. DENZIL EDIE ABSOLUTELY, UNEQUIVOCALLY, DID SAY THIS!

MY ADVICE!
1). IS TO READ THIS ARTICLE
For Immediate Release

Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association
1 NW OOIDA Drive, Grain Valley, MO
E-mail:ooida@ooida.com
Web site: www.ooida.com
Phone: (816) 229-5791
Fax: (816) 427-4468

OOIDA files class action complaint against DAC

July 8, 2004, Grain Valley, MO - The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA) announced today that it has filed a class action suit against USIS Commercial Services Inc., d.b.a. as DAC Services. OOIDA filed the suit along with five of its owner-operator members in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado on behalf of all professional drivers who are now, or may be in the future, the subject of a consumer report published by a motor carrier or by USIS or its predecessor, DAC Services.

In its complaint, OOIDA asserts that USIS (DAC) is a "consumer reporting agency" governed by the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), 5 U.S.C. 1681. Among other things, USIS purchases or otherwise acquires, without the permission of professional truck drivers, statements about them, including statements about their work records, and then sells "consumer reports" containing such statements to other motor carriers considering applications by drivers.

The suit alleges that USIS (DAC) has acquired consumer reports for employment purposes without notice to or permission from the drivers, and failed to satisfy its statutory responsibility as a consumer reporting agency to follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy in the collection and transmission of data through its reports. It has also failed to adopt reasonable procedures to eliminate and correct systematic errors in those communications. The information gathering system established by USIS (DAC) makes no provision for drivers to review or comment on carrier-submitted Termination Record forms or submit rebuttals to such reports before such forms are placed in the USIS database. Typically, drivers learn of the need to take such action only after experiencing adverse action based on a USIS (DAC) Report.

OOIDA and its member plaintiffs are asking the court to declare that certain phrases used in USIS consumer reports are inaccurate and therefore a violation of the FCRA, and to enjoin the use of such statements. It also seeks to enjoin USIS from receiving consumer reports from motor carriers without first providing notice to and obtaining permission from drivers. Finally the suit seeks compensatory and punitive damages for violations of the FCRA and restoration to the class the profits it has generated through both the obtaining of consumer reports and the reporting of inaccurate statements about class members in violation of the FCRA.

OOIDA President Jim Johnston notes the collaboration that his taken place since the mid-1990s between DAC and motor carriers to establish a reporting system of driver work histories that has the potential to discourage and eliminate truck drivers who may be excellent, safe members of the industry, but who may have resisted pressure from the motor carrier to bend the safety laws. Johnston points out these drivers may have insisted in being paid on time, or otherwise attempted to assert his or her rights as an employee or owner-operator under the law.

"For years, OOIDA has received numerous complaints from professional truckers of abuse and intimidation under the DAC system," Johnston said, "especially with regard to the inaccuracy of reports, the ambiguity of the terminology used in the reports and the negative consequences of that coded language."

Specific language that OOIDA is challenging in its complaint includes the phrases "company policy violation," "unsatisfactory safety record," "excessive complaints," "cargo loss," "equipment loss," "quit/dismissed during training/orientation/probation," and "not eligible for rehire."

For example, with regard to "company policy violation" as stated in the complaint, "The phrase fails to denote any policy, generally or specifically, or the date, place or manner of any alleged "violation." The phrase is inherently ambiguous in that company policies vary widely from company to company; within any given company some policies may be lawful and appropriate while others may not; some policies may deal with important matters while others deal with trivial matters; the reader is completely uninformed as to what specific policy was purportedly violated and whether such violation represents relevant information regarding the qualifications of the driver for future employment. But it does have a derogatory connotation. The use of the phrase is equivalent to saying, 'He did something wrong.' Because neither a prospective employer or a driver can know what its author was trying to communicate, the phrase is meaningless, will be used inconsistently, and is therefore 'inaccurate.' "

Johnston said that, as a direct result of this system, many professional truck drivers feel that they have been blackballed, having experienced great difficulty in finding acceptable employment or lease contracts in the industry. "It's time for this unjust system of blackballing and intimidation to come to an end," he said.

USIS Services, which is an Oklahoma-based company, claims to store employment histories for more than 2,500 motor carrier clients - including 95 percent of the largest 100 motor carriers - with access to more than 4.7 million driver records. Its predecessor, DAC Services has been a member of the American Trucking Associations (ATA) since about 1989 and USIS's District of Columbia office was opened in 2002 within the ATA location there.

Contact: Mike Schermoly, OOIDA (816) 229-5791

2). NOTIFY North Dakota Office of Attorney General!
Email: ndag@nd.gov

State Capitol
600 E. Boulevard Ave.
Dept. 125
Bismarck, ND 58505

Consumer Protection and Antitrust
4205 State Street
PO Box 1054
Bismarck ND 58502-1054
701 328-3404
800 472-2600

3). REQUEST ADVICE FROM Legal Services of North Dakota!
Primary Address: PO Box 1893
City: Bismarck
State: ND
Zipcode: 58502
Intake Phone: 800-634-5263
9-3PM

4). GO TO TRUCK DRIVERS UNITED
and Signup and File Your Complaint online under Blacklisted Companies

GOOD LUCK!