FMCSA System Modernisation (Motus) & Account Verification Identity Fraud

FMCSA has introduced a new registration modernization system, dubbed Movement: USDOT Registration System. It is aimed at modernizing registration, identity verification, and fraud prevention in the trucking industry. The main purpose of this system is to make the registration information of motor carriers, brokers, freight forwarders, and other regulated companies more accurate, secure, and reliable. Through Motus, users must use a Login.gov account, identity verification, and multi-factor authentication.

Business verification is also required for business accounts. FMCSA Registration Modernization FAQs. This can make it easier to identify who actually managed or controlled the trucking company from its registration records. This is particularly important in truck accident lawsuits involving a chameleon carrier. A chameleon carrier is a term referring to trucking companies that, to escape the negative safety history or regulatory tracking of the previous company, continue operating under a new business identity.

Having a new USDOT number alone, however, is not evidence of fraud. Through an ownership change, a merger or restructuring, or even a new corporate entity, legitimate businesses may continue to operate.

What Is Motus?

Motus is the all-new modernized USDOT Registration System from FMCSA. According to FMCSA, it aims to modernize the registration process, improve data quality and user experience, enhance records management capabilities across all uses of MCMIS, and strengthen fraud prevention efforts. FMCSA Move into MotionMotus was designed to manage any registration-related activities of motor carriers, brokers, freight forwarders, or other regulated entities on a contemporary platform.

Via this system, users will be able to manage data on registration, update information relevant to their USDOT, and control accounts for the company. In essence, Motus is useful in truck accident litigation because the registration activity entails some kind of nexus between authenticated users and confirmed business information. Registration information can be an important piece of that puzzle if identity, ownership, or management of a company is disputed.

Why did FMCSA Modernize its Registration System?

For instance, older registration systems may lead to inaccurate information, out-of-date records, and unauthorized changes. As with other companies, the ownership and management structures that drive the trucking industry evolve. This makes it very important to have your registration information be correct for safety and law enforcement purposes. Registration modernization has been one of the FMCSA's efforts to enhance system security and efficiency.

• Identity verification
• Login.gov authentication
• Multi-factor authentication
• Business verification
• Address validation
• Registration information validation
• Authorized-user controls
• Centralized registration information

Fraud prevention tools

Less Fraud. One of the system's primary goals, according to FMCSA's registration modernization materials, is better tracking of registration activities and preventing fraud as well as identifying high-risk operators.

FMCSA Registration Modernization - What’s Coming

FMCSA Moves System Identity Fraud

Note: All users of Motus must use Login. Complete identity verification with gov credentials. The aim of this is to prove that the person using your registration system is not a bot. Here are questions that attorneys may examine in a truck accident investigation:

• Who created the company account?
• Who completed identity verification?
• Who claimed the USDOT records?
• Who submitted company information?
• Updated registration information by whom?
• Who were the authorized users?
• Who had actual control over the registration account?
• Was the registration information tied to management from a previous carrier?
• If a company states they are 100% independent, yet publicly available records indicate that the leadership team is also connected to the management of another carrier, then more digging may be warranted.
• FMCSA targets identity theft and carrier/broker fraud explicitly.
• FMCSA Broker and Carrier Fraud and Identity Theft

Login.gov and Multi-Factor Authentication

Login. Gov is a key security component of Motus. Login .gov is required for FMCSA users. How to register with gov credentials for the new registration system. Login. gov also provides multi-factor authentication. The goal is to make accounts more secure and prevent unauthorized access. This means it allows the FMCSA to better verify exactly who is behind registration activity.

Login.gov Security

Login. Gov is one of the traditional security components in Motus. Login is required: FMCSA. With the new registration system, you will need your gov credentials to log on. Login. Gov offers two-factor authentication, providing another layer of protection when accessing your account. This process is aimed at better safeguarding registration accounts.

Identity Verification

Login. During registration and ongoing vetting, FMCSA can obtain more detailed information concerning the specific user behind registration activity. Authentication helps prove that the user using the registration system is associated with a registered identity. This helps for the enhancement of security and accountability. Activity that is recorded in the registration records is eligible as evidence in later investigations.

Verification Is Not Fraud-Proof

A key differentiator is Login. It is not possible to prove fraud just because of the verification of gov. If an account were verified by a person, it proves that this authenticated identity was used to register. This fact, without more, does not make a fraud. An allegation of fraud involves evaluating more evidence and all surrounding circumstances.

Additional Evidence

Login may not be the only record that investigators will need to review if there is an allegation of registration fraud. Gov authentication. They may evaluate registration records, activity on the account, and communications or other documentation to do so. This is useful as comparing various records can provide more insight into the identity, authorization, and context of registration activity. The final fraud conclusion will hinge on the totality of all evidence and law.

What Is a Chameleon Carrier?

Chameleon carriers are generally thought of as motor carriers that have registered under a new name or an affiliated corporate structure to escape negative safety history, enforcement action, or regulatory scrutiny. The FMCSA has gone after reincarnated or chameleon carriers as a safety issue. FMCSA Chameleon Carrier Report to Congress. In this situation, the fair question asked is whether the new company is indeed independent or essentially a continuation of the old carrier's operations.

The carrier has numerous safety violations and enforcement actions. Eventually, that company will go out of business, and a new one with the same or similar address, equipment, drivers, and management will open for business. Investigators should also look to see if the new company is merely carrying on old operations under a name change, which would raise red flags about the relationship of the two companies.

Chameleon Carrier USDOT Fraud Lawsuit

In case of a truck accident involving gaping holes in the front and back of cabs, alleged chameleon-carrier conduct can be crucial, especially when there has been a dispute over the safety history of the company involved or its actual operating identity through misidentification. Investigators can compare:

Registration of the new company in FMCSA records may warrant further investigation into the relationship between a new business and an old one if several independent records show similar persons, similar equipment, and a similar structure as that found at the previous operator. FMCSA has also published guidance on its methodology to identify Chameleon carriers and problems related to reincarnated carriers. FMCSA Chameleon Carrier Report.

An important point is that evidence must never be considered in a vacuum. That same address is weak evidence by itself, but when combined with the same management and similar trucks, drivers, and insurance structure, then it may mean something.

Motus Account Verification as Evidence

Motus account verification records may be particularly important proof when the carrier's identity is disputed. Attorneys can investigate:

• Who established the company account?
• Who completed identity verification?
• Who submitted the company information?
• Who claimed the USDOT record?
• Which company was official?
• Who was the authorized user?
• Who submitted the registration changes?

Claiming an Existing USDOT Number

Motus has a way for current registrants to claim their records with the USDOT. Companies are able to claim pre-existing records from the USDOT and will do so by creating a Motus company official account. FMCSA Move into Motion This information may be relevant when investigators are determining who actually controlled the company registration.

For example, if a person claims they had no connection to the old carrier, but registration records show the person was connected to the previous company's registration activities, attorneys may examine additional records.It can also be useful to compare this process with corporate records. If company documents show one individual owner but registration activity appears to be under the control of another individual, investigators may need additional discovery to understand the relationship.

Business Verification and Corporate Identity

Motus isn't just limited to individual identity verification. Business verification is also an important part of the registration process. FMCSA Registration Modernization FAQs: Corporate identity is not determined by the company name alone. A trucking operation may use multiple LLCs, corporations, trade names, subsidiaries, or related entities.Therefore, investigators can compare:

Illegal Operating Authority Commercial Truck Crash

A USDOT number and operating authority are not the same thing. Certain interstate for-hire motor carriers, brokers, and freight forwarders require operating authority. FMCSA-Operating-Authority FMCSA cautioned in particular that USDOT numbers and operating authority may never be sold, bought, or leased through a transaction other than as part of an actual business transaction. Enforcement issues from the FMCSA arise when the registration or operating authority of one company is improperly used by another unrelated company.

In truck accident cases, investigators need to determine who the actual operating entity was at the time of the crash and whether that entity had appropriate authority. The extent of this issue may be particularly relevant if the paperwork is in one company's name, but the operations are run by a connected or unrelated entity. This can be made clear by looking at the registration, insurance, and operational records.

USDOT Number vs. Authority

Note: A USDOT Number and an operating authority are not the same. Under certain conditions, you may need operating authority if you're a for-hire interstate motor carrier, broker, or freight forwarder. Currency registration has to do with the identification of carriers and safety information, while operating authority is tied up in the legal aspects of certain kinds of regulated operations. In an accident investigation, it may be essential to establish both statuses independently.

Improper Number Use

The FMCSA says those USDOT numbers and operating authority must not be sold, purchased, or leased other than as part of a legitimate reorganization or acquisition for another line or business segment. If a company abuses the registration or authority of an unrelated company, regulatory and enforcement concerns could arise. Investigators can scrutinize the registration records and corporate connections to get a sense of how it really operates.

There may be discrepancies in the documentation, which might attract further scrutiny.

Actual Operating Entity

In truck accident cases, investigators must identify the true operator of a vehicle at the time of impact. Finally, this might even be a good time to check that entity's operating authority and any other required registrations. This could be particularly relevant when there is one corporate name on the documents, but the operations are actually conducted by a related or separate entity. Business records and operational documents can help illustrate this relationship.

Registration and Insurance Records

An inquiry can then match registration records with those pertaining to insurance, leases, dispatch, and other operational documents. If multiple firms appear in separate documents, investigators can explore genuine control and accountability further. Background information about insurance coverage and the operating authority status may also bear on the circumstances of the crash.

The final legal outcome will, of course, depend on the laws applicable to any relevant geographical jurisdictions and/or internal corporate structure in play at the time.

Operating Authority Transfer Evidence

Attorneys must figure out if FMCSA accurately recorded the transaction when a trucking company is acquired or the corporate structure changes.

Important questions include:

• Was it a bona fide corporate business transaction?
• Did the ownership change?
• Was the management consistent?
• Was a new company created?
• New Operating Authority Needed?
• Did the transfer of authority receive adequate documentation?
• Were the same trucks used?
• Did the same drivers continue?
• Did they use the same call-in system?

Was this the same maintenance facility?

FMCSA has more information on Authority Requirements and Registration in its Operating-Authority resources. FMCSA - Operating Authority These questions can help differentiate between legitimate corporate restructuring and alleged regulatory evasion.

FMCSA Fraud Alerts and USDOT Number Misuse

The FMCSA provides warnings against improper sale, purchase, and leasing of USDOT numbers and operating authority. FMCSA Fraud Alerts: The FMCSA also addresses the imminent menace of identity theft for carriers and brokers. Identity Theft: An entity may have illegally used another motor carrier's USDOT in which their jurisdiction is attempting to deceive others.

One of the first things you will want to do in a truck crash investigation is confirm that the carrier identified on the documents related to the crash was, in fact, the one who operated the vehicle. Investigators should also compare vehicle marks vs. records, insurance information vs. bills of lading and dispatch records, as well as driver employment information vs. registration documents.

How Motus Can Help Expose a Chameleon Carrier

The purpose of Motus is to better verify registration information and improve fraud prevention. FMCSA has included registration modernization and fraud prevention as key objectives of Motus development. FMCSA Registration System Modernization and Fraud Prevention.

Proof of Concept Management Structure for Proxy Shell

If the registered company and business actual operators seem to you different, then maybe proxy shell management will be of great concern. Investigators should identify:

• Who hired the drivers?
• Who dispatched the trucks?
• Who controlled the maintenance?
• Who negotiated the freight contracts?
• Who arranged the insurance?
• Who controls bank accounts?

Who has established safety policies?

Who had a hold on the apparatus? If the same people are doing these roles for what is supposed to be separate businesses, corporate relationships can be looked at more closely. Getting hold of financial records can be helpful as well.

So long as the same controlling persons are responsible for making payments, payroll, equipment expenses, and paying insurance premiums, investigators should take a closer look at what is really going on with the corporate separation.

Stripping Corporate Veil Protections

Two separate corporations alone cannot establish that one corporation is liable for the other corporation. Because piercing the corporate veil is typically a state-law doctrine, each jurisdiction may have different elements needed to establish that the owners of an entity deserve personal liability. Common ownership, common control, abuse of corporate structure, commingling, fraudulent purpose, and lack of adequate separation are issues that may be relevant among possible grounds.

This data could be part of a larger evidence picture around Motus identity information. For instance, if Motus records link someone to company registration processes, that material can be weighed against corporate records, financial evidence, and operational evidence.

With an established timeline investigation, it can really make life a lot easier.

• January: Old carrier gets multiple safety violations.
• May: The New company is incorporated.
• June: Establishment of the new company FMCSA registration.
• June: A Similar business address appears.
• July: The same management continues to run the operations of the new company.
• July: Continued like-for-like equipment and drivers.
• Entity offers or continues to exercise operating authority. (August)
• September: A crushing tractor-trailer crash involving a new carrier's truck.

The inspector will then correlate the registration information against corporate filings together with insurance history, equipment records, driver experience, and safety history. A timeline is used to figure out if there was a significant connection between various events or just casual correlations. Perhaps timely, if the old carrier is under serious pressure from enforcers when the new company is created.

Prior FMCSA enforcement records

Attorneys should additionally bear in mind the need to preserve the evidence. When company registration, dispatch, or corporate records may result in a future court case, issuing preservation requests promptly could be of the utmost importance.

Movement account

The comparison table should only be used as a visual guide. Each of the connections has to be backed by a supporting document. Naming names or addresses alone does not meaningfully draw a conclusion.

Registration Fraud Versus Legitimate Corporate Transactions

Not every new USDOT number is a fraud. Businesses can legitimately change ownership, merge, establish a new LLC, acquire equipment, or reorganize corporate structure. Therefore, it is not appropriate to call the carrier a chameleon just because of the following facts:

• New USDOT Number
• New company name
• New LLC
• New ownership
• New equipment
• Business restructuring

The investigation is to determine whether the new entity is genuinely independent or was created or used to avoid regulatory history and obligations. Documentation is usually important in a legitimate corporate transaction. Investigators can better understand the actual transaction by reviewing the purchase agreement, ownership records, insurance documents, management changes, and FMCSA filings.

Why Motus Changes the Evidence Picture

Motus FMCSA provides additional layers of identity and business verification throughout the registration process. In older registration systems, investigators would have little choice but to rely primarily on public registration records, corporate filings, insurance information, and operational records.

Through Motus, a personalized and authenticated identity verification process is ideal for accounts that are needed by an OCA system, whereas a business also receives the necessary evidence trail or information on authorized access and registration of users.

This carrier does not abolish fraud entirely.

But it gives investigators a lead to find other evidence against alleged fraud suspects. Overall, the modern registration controls mandate a practice of improved identification and business event information among regulated entities, benefiting FMCSA high confidence. This may help both safety surveillance and enforcement as well.

Practical Truck Crash Example

Imagine Carrier A has a bad safety record and has had numerous inspections, crashes, and enforcement issues.

Carrier A just falls inactive for a bit.

Carrier B then begins operations. Carrier B has a similar address, comparable equipment, and a handful of the same drivers and management team. Investigators discover a connection between the registration of drivers for a new company and this person who handled activities related to the old company after he was involved in a disastrous truck crash.

Attorneys then for both companies:

• FMCSA records
• Corporate filings
• Insurance records
• Equipment records
• Driver records
• Management structure
• Safety history

How Lawyers Organize the Investigation

With any formal investigation, it's expedient to try and categorize the evidence. The first section may include registration evidence, authority information, and any Motus information. The second type is corporate records, which include ownership, incorporation, and management. The third might be operational evidence: drivers, trucks, dispatch and maintenance, or freight records. The fourth could be safety evidence, namely inspections, crashes and violations, enforcement history, etc.

Having these categories layered into a timeline gives investigators better insight into how the corporate structure translates to real operations.

The Importance of Registration History After a Severe Crash

Investigators into truck accidents that cause destruction do not just investigate the crash itself. Often, plaintiff attorneys and investigators scour the company's hiring practices, maintenance schedules, and safety management systems/regulation compliance, as well as the company's historical actions. If a carrier's corporate identity is suspect, registration history can offer further insight.

If the company had significant changes to its registration, or replaced management and created a new business identity for months before the crash, it would be up to investigators to determine whether that was designed for legitimate business interests or as a reaction to other safety issues and enforcement action.

Motus Evidence and Corporate Records

Investigation of Motus records alone, away from corporate records, is not enough. This is why it is vital that you cross-check various sources, as a strong story normally has to do with many unconnected events. For example, if the Motus record associates a name to a company registration check and corporate administrative documents also identify that name as being among managers or owning that entity, the evidence is inherently corroborative.

Investigators should check for discrepancies between registration information that lists one person as trust owner/control party status and, instead, someone else. This kind of cross-checking can discover potential discrepancies between ownership on paper and de facto operational control.

Key Questions in a Chameleon Carrier Investigation

There are a few baseline questions that may rise to prominence during the investigation:

Who owned the company?

It may be important to know legal ownership and beneficial control.

Who managed the company?

It can be helpful to define who will make day-to-day safety and operational decisions.

Who controlled the trucks?

Ownership, leases, and operational control of equipment can be compared.

Who hired the drivers?

One possible reason to examine the relationship between two allegedly independent companies could be that they used to share the same driver workforce.

Why did the new company even exist?

It has a real business reason, and what is useful there is the aspect of regulatory avoidance.

Conclusion

FMCSA Motion registration system: New ordering process for commercial trucks. Login is enhancing registration security and preventing fraudulent activities for FMCSA. Verify business identity, government records, and more validation tools. In reality, the biggest issue in a truck accident lawsuit isn't whether the carrier's USDOT number was new or old. The central question was whether the new entity was really independent or if the old carrier's operations were simply slipping into fresh clothes.

Registration evidence in suspected chameleon-carrier investigations should be assessed against corporate records, management relationships, equipment and drivers, insurance carrier ratings and safety-maintenance regulations, as well as FMCSA safety history. Motus identity-verification information may offer important evidence on which person created or controlled the registration account. The FMCSA has also cautioned against selling, buying, or leasing USDOT numbers and operating authority not in the context of a lawful corporate transaction.

FMCSA - Do Not Sell, Purchase, or Lease a USDOT or MC Number. A thorough investigation must consider registration records as just one more piece of a larger corporate and operational history. This gives attorneys a better idea of whether the new carrier is an actual going concern or merely continuing the purported Chameleon operation.