MOHAWK MOVING AND STORAGE Rips its' contracors and customers off- MOVING COMPANY SECRETS REVEALED!! also known as American Transfer and Staroage, a Mayflower agentCarrollton Texas

There is nothing illegal nor unethical about the dual agency issue. You have 2 Unigroup companies going out to bid on the same move - with large companies this sort of thing happens all of the time.

For example, large engineering firms have several subsidiaries all within the same corporation and often their subsidiaries will bid on how much a particular job is going to cost in terms of labor, materials, etc... One company I heard once sent 5 different subsidiaries to bid on one very large job; 2 of the 5 were bidding against one another, but the others didn't; in the end, they all worked in conjunction to meet the customer's needs.

Dual Agencies allow an agency to tap the resources not only of one particular van line, but 2 van lines, and that better meets your customers needs; if United can't meet delivery dates, Mayflower's might not have the same constraints. Sirva pretty much works the same way with North American and Atlas.

I suspect your agency probably didn't make a lot of money; on the whole a moving company will only make about 5% profit (or less) for every dollar in revenue on a big picture level, and given their location - they might not have made that much or lost depending on the mix of work. It leaves you having to do a lot of low-margin work, which no one wants to do.

I would stop trying to evaluate who I was in the industry - I've dealt with subs before and all you and anyone who reads this should need to know is that agencies don't allow good subs to get away. The bad ones always claim (1) they're owed a lot of money, and (2) they have a lot of stories to tell.

There is nothing illegal nor unethical about the dual agency issue. You have 2 Unigroup companies going out to bid on the same move - with large companies this sort of thing happens all of the time.

For example, large engineering firms have several subsidiaries all within the same corporation and often their subsidiaries will bid on how much a particular job is going to cost in terms of labor, materials, etc... One company I heard once sent 5 different subsidiaries to bid on one very large job; 2 of the 5 were bidding against one another, but the others didn't; in the end, they all worked in conjunction to meet the customer's needs.

Dual Agencies allow an agency to tap the resources not only of one particular van line, but 2 van lines, and that better meets your customers needs; if United can't meet delivery dates, Mayflower's might not have the same constraints. Sirva pretty much works the same way with North American and Atlas.

I suspect your agency probably didn't make a lot of money; on the whole a moving company will only make about 5% profit (or less) for every dollar in revenue on a big picture level, and given their location - they might not have made that much or lost depending on the mix of work. It leaves you having to do a lot of low-margin work, which no one wants to do.

I would stop trying to evaluate who I was in the industry - I've dealt with subs before and all you and anyone who reads this should need to know is that agencies don't allow good subs to get away. The bad ones always claim (1) they're owed a lot of money, and (2) they have a lot of stories to tell.

There is nothing illegal nor unethical about the dual agency issue. You have 2 Unigroup companies going out to bid on the same move - with large companies this sort of thing happens all of the time.

For example, large engineering firms have several subsidiaries all within the same corporation and often their subsidiaries will bid on how much a particular job is going to cost in terms of labor, materials, etc... One company I heard once sent 5 different subsidiaries to bid on one very large job; 2 of the 5 were bidding against one another, but the others didn't; in the end, they all worked in conjunction to meet the customer's needs.

Dual Agencies allow an agency to tap the resources not only of one particular van line, but 2 van lines, and that better meets your customers needs; if United can't meet delivery dates, Mayflower's might not have the same constraints. Sirva pretty much works the same way with North American and Atlas.

I suspect your agency probably didn't make a lot of money; on the whole a moving company will only make about 5% profit (or less) for every dollar in revenue on a big picture level, and given their location - they might not have made that much or lost depending on the mix of work. It leaves you having to do a lot of low-margin work, which no one wants to do.

I would stop trying to evaluate who I was in the industry - I've dealt with subs before and all you and anyone who reads this should need to know is that agencies don't allow good subs to get away. The bad ones always claim (1) they're owed a lot of money, and (2) they have a lot of stories to tell.

Why file a second complaint? Well easy to explain. When a company triews to use deceit like I propose they have done in the past, and bid on the same job with differant company names, the general public MUST KNOW about these acts!!!
Like I said before, my business was run like a buisiness. Noone is even close to disgruntled. I feel the general public has a right to know who they deal with. Plain and simple. I think you might be a old, disgruntled ex-agent employee who never saw a paycheck or settlement over $2000.

I got most of my money. I will get the rest of it. I am not too worried about it. It's really up to Mohawk on how they want to PAY.


They operate under two company names, there needs to be two complaints since both names operate out of the same office address. Thanks for your concern.

One time was enough, and I didn't believe that one..........