2. Enforcement Agency Testimony
Investigator Brian Kahrs testified that in December 2000, the Transportation Enforcement Branch of the CPSD received information and opened an investigation into the allegation that Robinson was operating as an unlicensed household goods carrier. CPSD closed the investigation in July 2001 without any enforcement action. On July 30, 2001, Robinson applied to obtain a household goods carrier permit. He did not submit any evidence of public liability and property damage or cargo insurance with the application. In January 2002, CPSD asked Robinson to provide a written explanation of his criminal record. He declined to pursue the application further, and in September 2002, the Commission denied the application. In May 2003, CPSD sent a letter to Complainant advising him that he could not operate as a household goods carrier until he obtained a valid, active Commission permit.5
Kahrs testified that on January 24, 2007, he found a flyer advertising "Have Van-Will Travel" in Hayes Valley, San Francisco. That day, CPSD sent Complainant a Cease and Desist letter. Kahrs stated that he saw Robinson perform a household goods move in Hayes Valley on February 1, 2007, and Robinson told him that he had a household goods application pending, but he was having trouble getting insurance. On February 21, 2007, Robinson and his paralegal representative met with another CPSD investigator who advised him that he could not conduct household moves without authorization, instructed him to remove the T-number from his van, and gave him a blank application for a household goods carrier permit.6
Investigator Kahrs reported that on April 19, 2007, he found a new Have Van-Will Travel flyer in Hayes Valley. The next day, Complainant signed an Official Notice acknowledging that any operation as an unlicensed household goods carrier and/or advertising household goods service without the required authority could result in penalties.7 In May 2007, February 2008, and May 2008, Commission Consumer Services Representatives and a CPSD Investigator telephoned the number advertised for Have Van-Will Travel and arranged for household goods carrier moves with Robinson.8 Kahrs further testified that he found Robinson's flyers posted in the Bernal Heights, Rincon Hill, and Hayes Valley neighborhoods in San Francisco during June and December 2007 and February and May 2008, respectively.9
Kahrs stated, in direct testimony, that consumers respond to advertisements by unlicensed household goods carriers, which in turn exposes them and the general public to unlicensed movers' financial risks. Telephone service is essential for a moving company to conduct business. In fact, licensed and unlicensed movers alike arrange the majority of moving services through the use of telephone service. Kahrs noted that the Commission requires household goods carriers to have public liability and property damage insurance coverage of at least $600,000 combined single limit; cargo insurance protection of not less than $20,000; and workers' compensation insurance coverage. Unlicensed movers often do not carry the required insurance. Such failure places their customers, employees, and the motorists with which they share the public highways at serious risk. Failure to pay for the required insurance enables an unlicensed mover to charge lower rates, unfairly compete, and take business away from legal, licensed moving companies.10 According to Kahrs, the Commission's various rules and regulations reflected in its Maximum Rate Tariff 4 and GO 142 protect consumers by enabling the public to verify that a mover is properly licensed11 and requiring carriers to have adequate equipment as well as capable help.
Based on the preceding particulars, Kahrs prepared an affidavit that stated that telephone number (510) 451-5000 was being used to assist an unlicensed moving company in violation of the law, and the unlicensed service is preying on the public. The affidavit noted that the Commission staff has found the disconnection of telephone service to be a very effective means of stopping ongoing criminal activity. CPSD presented this affidavit to Superior Court Judge Nakahara, who signed the disconnection order, finding probable cause.
5 Exh 1 at p. 2 (Testimony of Brian Kahrs).
6 Id.
7 Exhs 7, 8, and 16 at p. 3.
8 Exhs 9, 12, 15, and 16 at p. 3.
9 Exhs 10, 11, 13, 14, and 16 at p. 3.
10 Exh 1 at pp. 3-4.
11 Maximum Rate Tariff 4 contains a requirement that carriers include their permit number in all advertising. (Item 88, paragraph 7.)
