Each year, between 1.3 million and 1.5 million households have commercial moving firms move their household goods to another state, according to industry estimates. There are approximately 2,900 motor carriers registered with the Department of Transportation that are active in transporting household goods across state lines. These 2,900 carriers represent a small percentage of the approximately 654,000 commercial motor carriers engaged in all aspects of interstate commerce (and registered with the Department). Household goods carriers are of three types: national van lines, independent carriers, and short-haul movers. Most interstate moves are conducted by approximately 25 van lines—companies that market and dispatch moves in which agents, acting on the van lines’ behalf, perform the actual moves. These agents are local moving companies that own the moving equipment and storage facilities used in interstate moves. Independent carriers lease or own their own equipment and storage facilities but do not have agents. Independent carriers often share storage facilities and some equipment in an effort to provide enough capacity and flexibility to compete with the van lines. According to industry officials, short-haul movers typically undertake moves of around 500 miles that do not require storage facilities or return trip loads of goods. Because most consumers seldom use moving companies for their household goods, they are less prepared to protect themselves financially than are commercial shippers. Until 1996, the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) had regulatory responsibility for interstate household goods carriers, including issuing regulations, conducting oversight activities, and taking enforcement actions. The ICC Termination Act of 1995, among other things, dissolved ICC and transferred these consumer protection functions (called “economic regulation”) to the Department of Transportation. These functions were further assigned to the motor carrier safety office within the Federal Highway Administration. The Motor Carrier Safety Improvement Act of 1999 transferred these consumer protection functions to a new organization within the Department, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration. In addition to its headquarters facilities, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration maintains a field office structure consisting of 4 service centers and 52 division offices—one in each state, Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia. Data weaknesses do not allow us to assess the nature and extent of the problems consumers have had nationwide with various aspects of the interstate moving industry since 1996. One reason is that the government offices and business and industry organizations we contacted that receive complaints from consumers do not centrally compile information on the nature of the complaints and often do not differentiate between complaints against interstate and intrastate moving companies. Another reason is that organizations did not collect information on how the complaints were resolved. The federal motor carrier administration estimates that it receives 3,000 to 4,000 complaints about interstate moves each year. Available information indicates that consumers have complained about a broad range of problems in dealing with household goods carriers in recent years. Some alleged problems reflect misunderstandings between consumers and carriers about (1) when services were to be paid for or (2) what services were included in the original cost estimate provided to the consumer. For example, a carrier arrived at the destination with the consumer’s goods on the scheduled delivery date but the consumer was not present; the carrier then took the consumer’s goods to a storage facility—at an extra cost to the consumer—until the consumer arrived, and the consumer complained about the extra cost. In another example, the consumer failed to obtain complete information about the services, accepting a telephone estimate of the expected moving charges rather than having the moving company provide an on-site estimate—and then complained when the actual cost of the move included charges for services that were not covered by the estimate. Other problems occurred when a carrier lost or damaged the consumer’s goods but the consumer and the carrier disagreed on the amount of compensation or the carrier took a long time to settle the claim. In some instances, the disputed amounts involved thousands of dollars. Consumers have also complained that carriers held their goods “hostage” by refusing to unload them from the moving truck until the consumer paid the entire balance of money due, even though the consumer is not required to pay more than 110 percent of the estimated amount to the carrier at the time of delivery. Yet some carriers required payment in full—over and above the 110 percent amount—in cash at the time of delivery. And when the consumer did not pay the amount above 110 percent of the estimate, the carrier stored the goods at an added cost to the consumer. Finally, available information indicates that some consumer complaints arose because unscrupulous carriers had no regard for the rights of consumers or for the law. In some instances, carriers provided unreasonably low estimates that they had no intention of honoring. Some carriers also extracted unreasonably high fees from consumers by imposing unjustified and exorbitant charges for packing, boxes, tape, and other ancillary services. In addition, some carriers engaged in a practice called “weight bumping,” in which they artificially inflated the weight of a shipment by including the weight of another household’s goods when calculating the final bill. Consumers have complained that, in some instances, even when they have won judgments against carriers in court, they have been unable to collect damages because the carrier has hidden its assets. The limited information that is available from selected federal and industry organizations suggests that the number of complaints against household goods carriers is increasing. The complaints recorded by 12 federal motor carrier administration division offices about interstate household goods carriers doubled from 318 in 1996 to 659 in 1999. (Two other division offices we contacted did not record complaints received.) Nationwide data maintained by the Council of Better Business Bureaus indicate a nationwide increase in complaints against interstate and intrastate household goods carriers from about 3,000 in 1996 to about 5,100 in 1999. Another measure—consumer requests for formal arbitration proceedings to resolve disputes with carriers—indicates an increase in consumer dissatisfaction. Such requests submitted to the American Moving and Storage Association increased between 1996 and 2000 from about 100 to over 700. While all consumer complaints or requests for arbitration may not have merit, they represent consumer dissatisfaction that consumers want addressed. (See app. II for additional information.) To resolve individual disputes over interstate shipments of household goods, consumers are expected to avail themselves of self-help mechanisms, such as neutral arbitration. Under the ICC Termination Act of 1995, the Department of Transportation is authorized to conduct oversight and provide enforcement activities, among other things, to protect these consumers. For moves of household goods across state lines, as for other services, consumers are primarily responsible for protecting their own interests. It is up to them to select a reputable carrier, ensure that they understand the terms and conditions of the contract, and understand the remedies that are available to them when problems arise so that they can resolve disputes directly with the carrier. Typically, a consumer first tries to work with the carrier directly or through state or local government agencies, if such help is available, to resolve a dispute. If the results are not satisfactory, the consumer can seek further recourse—arbitration—through industry and business associations, such as the American Moving and Storage Association, the Council of Better Business Bureaus, and other independent arbitration organizations nationwide. Alternatively, the consumer can pursue civil litigation for violations of the household goods consumer protection statutes and regulations. Since 1996, the Department of Transportation has had primary federal authority for regulating the interstate household goods moving industry— specifically, for issuing regulations to protect consumers, conducting oversight activities (including reviewing carriers’ compliance with those regulations), and taking enforcement actions. Among other things, the Department’s existing consumer protection regulations cover the (1) types of cost estimates carriers can provide to consumers, (2) guidance that carriers must provide to consumers about their rights and responsibilities when they move, (3) approved methods for carriers to weigh shipments of household goods used to determine the final costs of the move, (4) process through which carriers handle inquiries and complaints, and (5) maximum charges consumers are required to pay at the time their goods are delivered to the final destination. Historically, the Department’s oversight activities for all types of commercial motor carriers—not just household goods carriers—include collecting information on the state of the industry, such as complaints lodged against registered carriers. The Department also reviews compliance with regulatory requirements (called “compliance reviews”) at a carrier’s base of operations. When it identifies instances of noncompliance, the Department can rely on a variety of enforcement activities. For example, it can issue orders to compel compliance, impose civil monetary penalties, revoke the carrier’s operating authority, or seek federal court orders to stop regulatory violations. While the Congress provided the Department with the authority to regulate the interstate household goods moving industry, a House Committee report accompanying the 1995 act directed the Department not to intervene and help resolve individual complaints—as was the practice of ICC. According to Department officials, the Department has followed this direction and, when it undertakes enforcement actions, focuses on patterns of behavior (e.g., multiple complaints) by a carrier. Another federal agency, the Surface Transportation Board, has the authority to determine whether a moving company’s charges to consumers are consistent with its tariff (a published list of charges for specific services provided). Consumers can use the Board’s opinion in negotiating with the carrier or in court. The states may regulate the transportation of household goods within their boundaries (intrastate transportation). In addition, 9 of the 14 states we contacted attempt to help consumers with complaints involving interstate transportation. According to state officials, this involvement is generally limited to informal mediation of the complaint with the carrier, unless state officials believe the carrier has violated that state’s consumer protection or fraud statutes. State involvement in matters involving interstate carriers is limited, at least in part, by a federal statute that preempts a broad range of state law claims for loss or damage in interstate transportation. (See app. III for additional information on states’ roles.) Since the Department assumed authority for the oversight and enforcement of the household goods moving industry 5 years ago, its activities in all areas—consumer education, oversight, compliance, and enforcement— have been minimal.