Public Forums of Discussion

share franchise news, to prosper and amuse

The Franchise Owner's most trusted news source


Log In / Register | Nov 20, 2017

The UPS Store, Tales of Gore

Stories of ownership failure, carnage and regrets about The UPS Store (TUPSS), formerly known as Mail Boxes Etc. OH, and the rebuttals to those horror stories too.

661 Forum Remarks

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

2006 ONLY

Terminations/Non-renewals
Aron Fliman 35 Morris Rd Tenafly, NJ 07670 201-894-8848
MG Anthony Enad 4381 Foxford Way Dublin, CA 94568 925-828-4094
Tom & Mary Lott 8829 Cypress Wood Ave Las Vegas, NV 89134-0315
Joel Ehrenberg 4049 Broadway New York, NY 10032
Michael Williams 5116 S Narcissus Ave Broken Arrow, OK 74011 918-449-9195
Richard Smucker 9081 Maral Trail Centerville, OH 45458-3629 513-885-7387
Chris Parsons 5209 NW 122 Terrace Oklahoma City, OK 73162 972-899-1703
James Nieman 4230 S Raymond Rd Waterloo, IA 50701 319-504-5785
Michael Perko 279 East 280th Street Euclid, OH 44132-1307
Lyle Johnson 5314 El Tejano San Antonio, TX 78233-5509 210-656-1782
Donald Austin 1900 SW 11th Avenue Austin, MN 55912 507-433-1468
George Tatum 46-428 Haiku Plantations Drive Kanehohe, HI 96744 808-235-8386
Yvonne Cooper
Charles Conley 12802 Stardell Whittier, CA 90601-2435 310-696-4491
Catherine Thomas 5136 Castor Avenue Philadelphia, PA 19124-1741 215-289-3223
Lewis Johnson II 532 SW Rimrock Apt 18 Redmond, OR 97756-1953 503-548-1413
Karl Fortsch 6 Shannon Court Somerset, NJ 08873-5017 908-846-7180
Tom D Weedman 7620 Toltee Dr N Little Rock, AR 72116-4586 501-834-1033
David A Derus 2227 W Vine St Lodi, CA 95242-3725 209-334-4073
Patricia Craig
Gil McDougal 6715 Limerick Ct Indianapolis, IN 46250-4415 317-842-7129
Martin Senoff 381 Gerry Rd No. Brunswich, NJ 08402 908-297-5567
Irene Sanford 88700 Shoreline Loop Florence, OR 97439-9171 503-997-2336
Dennis Meeks 1335 E Vine Ct Visalia, CA 93292-7352 209-732-6674
Stephen Christo 4310 Braysworth Dr Houston, TX 77072-1822 713-933-5897
Walt/Lynn Paton 8225 Oak Knoll Drive Granite Bay, CA 95746-9373 916-791-4404
Dale Martinez 1875 N Birch Avenue Reedley, CA 93654-8701 209-638-1959
Michael Moran 1316 NW Sheridan Rd Lawton, OK 73505-5212 405-351-2015
Michael Moran 1316 NW Sheridan Rd Lawton, OK 73505-5212 405-351-2015
Glenn Sturgis 67 Skyline Dr Salem, VT 06420-4108 203-859-1584
Hillal Baradehi 4956 Seaford Circle Irvine, CA 92604-2424 714-552-6375
Craig/Marcia Hansen 9553 Tivoli Circle Cypress, CA 90630-3570 714-995-3257
Zaheer Azam 18506 W Oceana Ct Canyon Country, CA 91351-3440 805-251-8208
Mary Dunseith #5 Berrypick Woodlands, TX 77380-1390 713-364-8936
Jeffrey Mullen 13284 Tiverton Rd San Diego, CA 92130-1031 858-259-6145
Sharon James 930 2nd Street Natchitchoes, LA 71457-4715 318-356-0390
Christina L May 4605 Jessica Lane North Royalton, OH 44133-5267 216-582-5995
Waldon Louie 216-5th Ave San Francisco, CA 94118 415-752-5627
Patrick/John Weir 416 E 81st Street #C New York, NY 10028-5892 212-772-0239
Roger Moore 11485 Clinton Bar Road Pine Grove, CA 95665-9722 209-223-9377
Denise C Taylor 314 Shadeland Ave Drexel Hill, PA 19026 610-394-6775
Arthur Brestlin 155 Ravenhurst Ave Staten Island, NY 10310 718-447-2474
David Kopchak 503 C-4 West Lakeshore Dr Port Clinton, OH 43452 419-734-4832
Luigi Giunta 392 E 3rd St Brooklyn, NY 11218 718-431-8244
Jeffrey Collard 1609 E Firmin St Kokomo, IN 46902-2418 317-868-0283
Reymundo Puentes 12400 Rojas Space 151 El Paso, TX 79928 915-858-9869
John Cummo 29 Shattuck Rd Hadley, MA 01035 415-549-1844
Scott Gougis 465 E Honors Pt Court Slidell, LA 70458 985-643-9329
Frank Scarso 31 Dell Court Staten Island, NY 10307 718-227-6026
Anthony Jarvis 9501 Tamar Trail Fort Wayne, IN 46825 219-489-7713
Lillie Cain 4800 W Rasmussen Rd Ludington, MI 49431 231-845-2565
Sam Molinaro 4214 Fox Hill Dr Sterling Heights, MI 48310 586-604-4990
Steve C Busch 14025 Country Rd 14 Perryton, TX 79070 806-435-3208
Arthur Brestlin 155 Ravenhurst Ave Staten Island, NY 10310 718-447-2474
Rey Martinez 19 Paseo Viento Rancho S Margarita, CA 92688 949-589-2360
Larry Davis 23729 S Southview Dr Claremore, OK 74019 918-343-2660
Issam Mishu 821 Melrose Place Knoxville, TN 37916-3426 615-693-1008
James Gerlach 13900 NE 31st Pl Bellevue, WA 98005-1881 239-254-9503
Cathleen Paguio 3709 W Ellery Fresno, CA 93711
Benjamin Amos 377 Santa Clara Avenue #312 Oakland, CA 94610 510-891-9832
Shekhar Gosai 1916 Interface Lane Apt #14 Charlotte, NC 28262 704-921-1572
Ahaji Amos 7450 Overbrook Dr St. Louis, MO 63121 314-385-0099
Ali Altai 22045 Newbridge Dr Lake Forest, CA 92630-6512 714-770-4941
David Chaffin 809 Lake Meadows Circle Rockwal, TX 75087 903-450-1446
Medina Sadiq 369 East 148th St Bronx, NY 10455
James Silva 937 Nemeth St Bohemia, NY 11716-2120 516-563-6961
Joseph Smidt 258 Middleton Rd P.O. Box #258 Boxford, MA 01921-0258 508-887-5035
David Smith 4924 N Melrose Ave Tampa, FL 33629 813-784-7249
Juanita Greene 4575 Alridge Dr Memphis, TN 38109
Paul Wehrs 1984 Richway Land SE Owatonna, MN 55060 507-446-8646
Bradley Beilinson 4207 N Lost Springs Dr Agoura Hills, CA 91301-5328 818-880-1246
Gerald Reed Route 1 Box 1234 Hermiston, OR 97838-9530 541-567-9352
Russell Kawano 2171 Crosscreek Lane Boise, ID 83706-6706 208-343-8881
Mona Khoury 12208 Fernando Court San Diego, CA 92128-1216 858-673-1643
Shabbir Azam 9420 Reseda Blvd #3 Northridge, CA 91324 805-298-1272
Chang Nim Kim 2885 W 7th Street Los Angeles, CA 90005-3907 213-385-7272
Jennifer Boggs 5071 State Rd 252 Brookville, IN 47012 765-647-1392
James Silva 350 3rd Ave New York, NY 10010-2310 212-599-1361
Janet Reddington 3029 Fir Oaks Dr SW Albany, OR 97321-3553 541-928-6601
Carlos Garcia 601 Pelham Parkway North #207 Bronx, NY 10467 718-654-6062
Keith Russell 4107 Crest Ridge Rd Irving, TX 75061-9115 972-986-0105
Keith Russell 4107 Crest Ridge Rd Irving, TX 75061-9115 972-986-0105
James Gordon 369 Scotland Road South Orange, NJ 07079-3019 201-761-0400
Terence Mitchell 195 Montague Street Brooklyn, NY 11201 718-722-5353
Sukhi Sandhu 1346 Southern Oak Ave Simi Valley, CA 93063 805-955-9166
Dana Houser 4020 C Street Lincoln, NE 68510 402-327-9375
Joyce Wagner 812 Scruggs Road Meridian, MS 39301 601-482-6649
Richard Schaefer 34 Windsor Court Delmar, NY 12054-4304 518-439-6602
Kent C Skurkey 20100 Lorain Rd #504 Fairfield Park, OH 44126-3432 440-895-9968
Vincent Natelli 5 John F Kennedy Drive Blauvelt, NY 10913 845-359-9567
Michael Foscone 842 Sylvan Rd Lancaster, PA 17601 717-672-0913
Charles Wilson 208 Wellington Ct Belair, MD 21014
J Barre Conley 1 Doug Dr Shawnee, OK 74804-1114 405-273-1810
Pratibha Patel 217 Harvest Row Ct Cary, NC 27513 919-468-8119
Jerome Salerno
Bill Heard 5754 Greer Loop SW Albuquerque, NM 87105-6760 508-877-3839
Carmen Parra 1443 Papago Place Nogales, AZ 85621 602-287-5406
Salah Kidwai 202 East Selwood Ln Columbia, SC 29212-8106 803-781-5194
Stanley Hoover 1410 Regatta Lane Monument, CO 80132 719-264-0081
James Kiser 111 Tallassee Trail Leesburg, GA 31763 229-759-8189
Sheila Conway 4213 NW 148th Street Oklahoma City, OK 73134
Paul Lanning 1415 Melbourne Drive New Haven, IN 46774-2649
Thomas Dance 3818 Cedar Springs #101-407 Dallas, TX 75219 214-683-8466
Vincent Natelli 5 John F Kennedy Drive Blauvelt. NY 10913 845-359-9567
Peter Tan 751 N El Camino Real San Mateo, CA 94401 650-340-7167
James Silva
Vincent Natelli 5 John F Kennedy Drive Blauvelt, NY 10913 845-359-9567
Kevin McMahon RR4, Box 200 Putney, VT 05346 802-387-2581
Patrick Perry 22 Albany Circle Beverly, MA 01915-1267 508-927-3848
Herbert Saywitz 1621 E Mission Hills Rd #202 Northbrook, IL 60062 847-564-1317
Robert Smith 100 Pheasant Drive Marietta, GA 30067 770-956-7658
Jonathon Bronsdon 15 North St Westford, MA 01886-1244 978-392-9367
Mark Bilodeau 149 Lake St Auburn, ME 04210 207-783-8261
Michael Wiginton 3912 Brave Trail Kennesaw, GA 30144-5015
Ravindra Mallavarapu 916 Eale Ridge Rd Cedar Falls, IA 50613 319-277-2048
Robert Hayes 4 Rockwood ST Walpole, MA 02081-4110 508-668-4801
Nancy Guy 1240 W 70th Street Kansas City, MO 64113 816-444-5174
Stuart Silbert 24 Turning Mill Rd Sharon, MA 02067 339-364-0225
Stuart Silbert 24 Turning Mill Rd Sharon, MA 02067 339-364-0225
Karl Waller 4812 Granada Dr Yorba Linda, CA 92886-2853 714-693-1062
Warren Buck 12823 Vidorra Vista Dr San Antonio, TX 78216 210-408-6777
Gary Nicodemus 5206 David Street Indianapolis, IN 46226-1730 317-545-8520
Brian Berry 6005 Northridge Rd Columbia, SC 29206 803-782-1400
Gary Pierantoni 74 Genesee Blvd Atlantic Beach, NU 11509-1314 516-239-1459
Michael Paternoster 124 Ridgewood Road Glastonbury, CT 06033 860-659-4341
Don Bingham 1710 Big Horn Houston, TX 77090-1865 713-444-4890
Tulsidas Patel 6 Hitching Post West Hills, CA 91307-1132
Judith Adamson 1707 Boswell Dr Laramie, WY 82070-8115 307-742-7534
Sue Bean 3003 Cardinal Ridge Dr Greensboro, NC 27410 336-664-6365
Norman L Anderson 7020 Chad St Anchorage, AK 99518-2055 907-344-1334
Steven Johnson 26 Twisted Birch Pl Ct The Woodlands, TX 77381-4526 281-292-6256
Mail Boxes Etc., Inc.
Jayesh M Patel 8901 Windjammer Drive Raleigh, NC 27615 919-844-1200
James/Carol Cotcher 1034 Emerald Bay Rd So Lake Tahoe, CA 96150 530-542-1943
Louis Jordan 150 Lombard St Apt 208 San Francisco, CA 94111
Robert W Courtney 1007 Oberlin Drive Columbus, OH 43221-1627 614-451-8931
Christopher Burrenll 111 Duncan Road Greenville, SC 29617 864-294-1921
Peter Sham 65 Gordon Corner Road Marlboro, NJ 07746-1119 908-972-2521
Rick Biggs 382 Upper Valley Rd Rochester, NY 14624-2308 716-247-3979
Jim J Rogodinski 5 Tower Hill Road Hinsdale, NM 03451-2534 603-336-7138
Gregory Rosnow 6188 Edmonson Ave NE Monticello, MN 55362 763-295-3299
Charles Morrison PO Box 1053 Port Isabel, TX 78578 956-963-6344
Patrick Gallagher 133 School Lane Springfield, PA 19064-2518 610-328-0486
Dennis Marino 5810 Arbor Walk Lane Tampa, FL 33624 813-968-5089
Kenneth Alford 2109 Scout Ln Mission, TX 78572 956-519-8176
James Humbert RR1 Box 4095 Fairhaven, VT 05743 802-265-4725
Michael McNulty 34 Sherbrooke Rd Lindenhurst, NY 11757 631-957-7989
Anil Gosalia 11914 Mission Rd Leawood, KS 66209 913-338-2057
James Lyons RT 2 Box 69A Genesee, ID 83832-9534 208-285-1413
Grace M Moore 165 Chestnut Valley Drive Doylestown, PA 18901 215-230-3360
Patrick Weir 320 E 91st Stret #3-FW New York, NY 10128-6027 212-348-8771
Brian Laws 2216 Lambert Dr Nampa, ID 83686-7297 208-463-0230
Kimberly Bond
Janyce Hutchinson 3234 South Newcombe St Apt 5201 Lakewood, CO 80227 303-378-7968
Howard Spanier 1043 Ashford Court Westlake Village, CA 91361-2001 805-496-4853
Sam Morgan 2 Alhambra Ct Pueblo, CO 81005 719-566-8687
Jose Escudero
Jay Friedman 227 Momar Dr Ramsey, NJ 07446
Paul Barry
Ron & Robert Rieder
George Grayeb 4495 Fox Hunt Court NE Ada, MI 49301 616-956-7692
Alexandra Torres 72-42 61 Street Glendale, NY 11385 718-381-3186
Mike Soliman 30762 Calle Barbosa Laguna Niguel, CA 92677-5506 714-249-9075
Bart Black 3276 Old Chisholm Rd Apt #1101-E Florence, AL 35630-1076 205-760-9452
Tim Horvath 2057 Bel Air Star Pkwy Sarasota, FL 34240 941-377-2504
Kathryn Stoddart 1611 West 63rd Street Excelsior, MN 55331-9001 612-474-6111
Leroy Skipper 5371 Aqua Street Columbus, OH 43229-9331 614-891-4448
John Raposo 157 Albion St Somerville, MA 02144-2619 617-666-0534
Lance Brown 407 Meriwether Paragould, AR 72450 870-239-4589
William Weir 9201 Vagas Rowlett, TX 75088 972-463-4389
R Michael/Barbara Durham 11210 Hylander Dr Houston, TX 77070-1336 713-376-7197
Jackson D Del Rash 8220 State Rd 84 Suite 301 Davie, FL 33324-4625 305-475-1653
Fernando Rey 8220 State Rd 84 Suite 301 Davie, FL 33324-4625
Daniel Wilson 12922 Bellaire Thornton, CO 80241 303-252-1727

Costco, The UPS Store Franchise

The UPS Store Franchise opportunity = SCAM!!!! Stay very clear away from this "opportunity".

Have you ever heard this one...

Has anyone out there heard about this one. When a seller sells a store he chooses to price it based on the subject to royalty amoount and then multiply it by.75. Has anyone heard of this one. Thanks...

Is the Brown Board of UPS represented by an attorney

Is the Brown Board Association of The UPS Store Franchise represented by an attorney and what percentage of The UPS Stores are members of the Brown Board? Anyone know?

Another Lovely Lawsuit with UPS

Exhibit A
FILED
2007 Sep-24 PM 06:18
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA
Case 5:06-cv-04686-IPJ Document 42-2 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 1 of 29
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHEASTERN DIVISION
[PROPOSED] COMPLAINT IN INTERVENTION
Plaintiffs allege all facts relating to themselves and their experiences based
on personal knowledge and all facts relating to other allegations based on
information, belief and the investigation of their counsel as follows:
I. INTRODUCTION
1. This is a proposed class action on behalf of all persons and entities
within the United States who have shipped packages with and received invoices
from defendant United Parcel Service (“UPS”), including (i) persons and entities
owning and operating UPS franchises across the United States under the Mail
Boxes, Etc. and UPS store brands; (ii) persons and entities owning and operating
“Third Party Retailers” of UPS shipping services (which includes Authorized
Shipping Outlets, UPS Alliance Locations located in Staples and Office Depot
retail locations, and Commercial Counters.); and (iii) persons and entities who
have accounts with UPS. Plaintiffs and members of the Class are referred to herein
as “Shippers." Collectively, the proposed Class of Shippers includes
approximately 10,000 package shipment centers and over one million account
holders.
BARBER AUTO SALES, INC.,
individually and on behalf of all
persons similarly situated,
Plaintiff(s),
v.
UNITED PARCEL SERVICES, INC.,
Defendant(s)..
Civil Action No: 5:06-cv-04686-IPJ
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
Case 5:06-cv-04686-IPJ Document 42-2 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 2 of 29
2
2. The action arises from UPS’s measurement system used to determine
the “billable weight” of a package and for assessing “large package surcharges” on
certain packages. UPS systematically rebills Shippers based on the dimension of
the packages as measured by UPS’s laser measuring or camera scanning devices
(hereafter, “the Measurement Overcharge Scheme.”).
3. The measuring devices are generically referred to as Multiple
Dimension Measuring Devices.
4. Prior to January 1, 2007, the “billable weight” UPS charged Shippers
for ground delivery was based on a package’s “package measurement” (expressed
in inches as the package’s length plus girth) or actual weight. Since then, UPS has
used a “dimensional weight” rate structure for all shipments including ground,
which bases “billable weight” on the greater of “dimensional weight” (determined
by multiplying length times width times height, and dividing by a constant) or
actual weight.
5. After a Shipper has measured a given package to determine its
“package measurement” or “dimensional weight,” determined the package’s
“billable weight,” and assessed “large package surcharges” when warranted, it
calculates its shipping cost for the desired services. The package then goes to UPS
for shipping.
6. When the package arrives at a UPS hub at some point during the
shipping process, UPS “remeasures” the package using its Multiple Dimension
Measuring Devices. It then charges the Shipper for the difference between UPS’s
measurement and that of the Shipper.
7. UPS’s Multiple Dimension Measuring Devices measure the
dimensions of a package in a different fashion from that which UPS mandates that
Shippers use in its “Rate and Service Guide,” which is incorporated by reference in
UPS’s contracts with Shippers.
Case 5:06-cv-04686-IPJ Document 42-2 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 3 of 29
3
8. In its Rate and Service Guide, UPS informs Shippers to measure the
dimension of packages by measuring along the package’s edges – even when the
packages are irregularly shaped and even when the package “bulges.”
9. According to the “Rate and Service Guide,” a measurement of .49
inches is to be rounded down, and a measurement of .50 inches is to be rounded
up. Accordingly, a false reading of as little as .01 inches can result in an
additional inch being added to a measurement. Each additional inch is
significant in that, in calculating “dimensional weight,” UPS uses the “cubic size”
of the package – which is length x height x width. Thus, while an 11 x 11 x 11
package has a cubic size of 1332 cubic inches, a 12 x 12 x 12 package has a cubic
size of 1728 inches. Likewise, an additional inch is significant for those packages
measured in terms of length plus girth, or: Length + [(2 x W) + (2 x H)]. Thus,
while an 11 x 11 x 11 package has a length plus girth “package measurement of 55,
a 12 x 12 x 12 package has a “package measurement” of 60.
10. On information and belief, the “tolerances” of the Multiple Dimension
Measuring Devices used by UPS are far greater than .01 inches, and are as high as
.25 inches. That means that if a Shipper properly measures one side of a package
at 11.25 inches, the Shipper would “round down” to 11 inches pursuant to UPS’s
Rates and Services Guide; on the other hand, UPS’s device might record a
measurement of 11.5 inches, which would then be “rounded up” to 12 inches.
11. Moreover, while Shippers are instructed to measure along the edges of
the package, on information and belief the Multiple Dimension Measuring Devices
measure along the highest points of each dimension; thus, if the package has a
“bulge,” the Multiple Dimension Measuring Device will record a higher
measurement than the measurement accurately recorded by the Shipper in keeping
with the Rate and Service Guide.
Case 5:06-cv-04686-IPJ Document 42-2 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 4 of 29
4
12. UPS knew that the Multiple Dimension Measuring Devices are
inaccurate and not reliable.
13. Because of UPS’s systematically inaccurate measurement system,
final bills or account reconciliations from UPS contain improper adjustments that
impose higher charges for shipping on Plaintiffs and members of the Class.
14. In this lawsuit, Plaintiffs seek injunctive relief to remedy UPS’s
inaccurate and unfair measurement practices, and damages to compensate
Plaintiffs and the Class for the losses they have suffered.
II. THE PARTIES
15. Plaintiff Persepolis Enterprise, is a Michigan corporation. It operates
UPS store No. 2742 pursuant to a franchise agreement with Defendant. Plaintiff
Peresopilis Enterprise has repeatedly notified UPS of improper dimension-based
price adjustments within 6 months of receiving the improper adjustments, and UPS
has often refused to correct the adjustments.
16. Plaintiff Berg Design Inc. (hereinafter, “Berg”) is an Oregon
corporation. Berg repeatedly notified UPS of improper dimension-based price
adjustments within 6 months of receiving the improper adjustments, and UPS has
often refused to correct the adjustments.
17. United Parcel Service, Inc. – Ohio (“UPS-OH”) is an Ohio
corporation with its principal place of business at 55 Glenlake Parkway NW,
Atlanta, Georgia 30328. At all times relevant hereto, UPS-OH provided package
pickup and delivery services in the central and western region of the United States.
It is referred to collectively, with the other United Parcel Service, Inc. entities, as
United Parcel Service, Inc., or “UPS.”
18. Defendant United Parcel Service of America, Inc. (“UPS-America”) is
a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at 55 Glenlake Parkway
NW, Atlanta, Georgia 30328. At times relevant hereto, UPS-America owned and
Case 5:06-cv-04686-IPJ Document 42-2 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 5 of 29
5
operated businesses providing pickup and delivery services for the transportation
of property. It is referred to collectively, with the other United Parcel Service, Inc.
entities, as United Parcel Service, Inc., or “UPS.”
19. Defendant United Parcel Service, Inc. (“UPS-New”) is a Delaware
corporation with its principal place of business at 55 Glenlake Parkway NW,
Atlanta, Georgia 30328. UPS-New is the parent corporation of and the successor in
interest to UPS-America. It is referred to collectively, with the other United Parcel
Service, Inc. entities, as United Parcel Service, Inc., or “UPS.”
20. United Parcel Service, Inc. – New York (“UPS-NY”) is a New York
corporation with its principal place of business at 55 Glenlake Parkway NW,
Atlanta, Georgia 30328. At all times relevant hereto, UPS-NY provided package
pickup and delivery services in the eastern region of the United States. It is referred
to collectively, with the other United Parcel Service, Inc. entities, as United Parcel
Service, Inc., or “UPS.”
III. JURISDICTION AND VENUE
21. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332, as amended by the Class Action
Fairness Act of 2005, this Court has subject-matter jurisdiction over this
nationwide class action because the matter in controversy exceeds $5,000,000,
exclusive of interest and costs, and is a class action in which a member of the Class
of plaintiffs is a citizen of a state different from the defendants. See 28 U.S.C.
§ 1332(d)(2)(A). In addition, this Court has subject matter jurisdiction over Count
I of this Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1331 and 18 U.S.C. § 1964(a) as a
federal question arising under RICO.
22. This Court has personal jurisdiction over the Defendant, and venue is
proper in this district, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(a) and (c). Venue is also
proper in this district because many Class Members reside and/or do business in
this district.
Case 5:06-cv-04686-IPJ Document 42-2 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 6 of 29
6
IV. FACTS
A. UPS and Its Relationship With Shippers
23. Founded in 1907 as a messenger company in the United States, UPS
has grown into a $42.6 billion dollar corporation by focusing on the goal of
enabling commerce around the globe. Today UPS is a global company with one of
the most recognized brands in the world. It has become the world’s largest
package delivery company and a leading global provider of specialized
transportation and logistics services. It manages the flow of goods, funds, and
information in more than 200 countries and territories worldwide.
24. In 2001, UPS ventured toward retail business by acquiring Mail
Boxes Etc., Inc., the world’s largest franchisor of retail shipping, postal and
business service centers. Within two years, approximately 3,000 Mail Boxes Etc.
locations in the United States re-branded as “The UPS Store” and began offering
lower UPS-direct shipping rates. The stores remain locally owned and operated,
and continue to offer the same variety of postal and business services.
25. Individuals who do not maintain their own accounts with UPS
typically ship their packages through either a franchisee or a Third Party Retailer.
In that circumstance, the individual deals only with the franchisee or Third Party
Retailer; the franchisee in turn deals with UPS and is UPS’s customer, or
“Shipper.”
26. If an individual takes a package to a UPS Store that is not a drop off
(pre-paid) package, the individual is then billed by the UPS Store. If an individual
ships a package at the UPS Store, the individual is the Franchisee’s customer. The
franchisee in turn is UPS’s customer (or “Shipper”) and UPS bills the franchisee.
27. Likewise, if an individual takes a package to a Third Party Retailer
and chooses to ship via UPS, the individual is then billed by the Third Party
Case 5:06-cv-04686-IPJ Document 42-2 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 7 of 29
7
Retailer. The individual is the Third Party Retailer’s customer, and the Third Party
Retailer is the Shipper. UPS bills the Third Party Retailer.
28. Finally, if an individual or entity has an account with UPS, that
individual is the Shipper. The Shipper weighs and/or measures the package, and
places a shipping label on the package that is generated using software provided by
UPS. UPS then bills the accountholder at regular intervals for all packages
shipped during a particular time period.
29. With respect to all Shippers, UPS’s services are provided as stated in
the applicable “UPS Retail Rate and Service Guide.” (“Rate and Service Guide.”)
30. In addition, UPS’s relationship with franchisees and with Third Party
Retailers is governed by a document called UPS Tariff/Terms and Conditions
(“Terms and Conditions”) (formerly two separate documents). The latest versions
of the Rate and Service Guide, and the Terms and Conditions, can be found at
www.ups.com.
B. UPS’s Billing Methods Involve Consideration Of Both The Weight And
Size Of A Package
31. As detailed below, in order to assess the appropriate charges for
shipping a given package, the Shipper must determine, among other things, the size
and weight of a package.
32. In each case, the cost of the shipment depends in part on the “billable
weight” of the package.
33. In calculating the billable weight for all domestic and international
shipments, Shippers are instructed to first determine actual weight of the package,
rounded up to the next full pound.
34. Next, for all air shipments (domestic and international) and for
ground shipments (sent after January 1, 2007) where the “cubic size” of the
package is 5,184 cubic inches or greater, the Shipper must also determine the
Case 5:06-cv-04686-IPJ Document 42-2 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 8 of 29
8
“dimensional weight” of the package, which is defined as “the amount of space a
package occupies in relation to its actual weight.”
35. To obtain the “dimensional weight,” the Shipper must first calculate
the “cubic size” of the package, which is L (length) x H (height) x W (width).
36. The “dimensional weight” for domestic shipments is defined as the
cubic size divided by 194. For international shipments, the “dimensional weight”
is defined as the cubic size divided by 166.
37. The “billable weight” is the greater of the actual weight or the
“dimensional weight” (with the caveat that for ground shipments where the cubic
size is 5,184 cubic inches or less, the “billable weight” is always the actual
weight).
38. All other things being equal (i.e., the type of service, and the zones of
travel), the greater the “billable weight,” the higher the Shipper’s cost for transport.
So, to take one example from page 24 of the “Rate and Service Guide,” a package
shipped “Next Day Air Early A.M.” with a “billable rate” of 31 pounds priced at
Zone “108” would cost the consumer $161.10, whereas a 32 pound package would
cost $164.00.
39. Prior to January 1, 2007, the Rate and Service Guide required that
customers shipping by UPS ground compare actual weight to its “package
measurement,” or dimensions expressed in inches as girth plus length. Under that
rate structure, packages with dimensions of girth plus length equal to or less than
84 inches would be charged according to the package’s actual weight. However,
packages whose girth plus length exceeded 84 inches were charged the greater of
actual weight or a flat rate, depending on the package’s dimensional classification.
Thus, for domestic packages:
• Packages measuring greater than 84 inches and not more than 108 inches
were categorized as Oversize (“OS”) I packages and charged the greater of
Case 5:06-cv-04686-IPJ Document 42-2 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 9 of 29
9
actual weight or a flat 30 pound rate;
• Packages measuring greater than 108 inches but not more than 130 inches
were categorized as OS II packages and charged the greater of actual weight
or a flat 70 pound rate; and
• Packages measuring greater than 130 inches and not more than 165 inches
were categorized as OS III packages and charged the greater of actual
weight or a flat 90 pound rate.
40. In addition, UPS assesses “Large Package Surcharges” of up to $45
for domestic services when its length plus its girth combine to equal greater than
130 inches but less than the “maximum UPS size” of 165 inches. In addition,
“large packages” are subject to a minimum “billable weight” of 90 pounds.
41. Packages that exceed 108 inches in length, or exceed a total of 165
inches in length and girth combined, are not acceptable for shipping. If such
packages are found in the UPS system, they are subject to an additional charge of
$50.
42. Finally, an “Additional Handling” charge of $8 is applied, inter alia,
to packages where the largest size exceeds 60 inches, or its second-longest side
exceeds 30 inches.
43. Accordingly, in many instances small differences in size
measurements lead to increased charges for UPS package shipments.
C. UPS Instructs Shippers on How To Measure Packages
44. UPS instructs Shippers on how to measure and weigh packages in its
Rate and Service Guide.
45. In particular, Shippers are instructed to determine the width, length
and height of packages by measuring along the edge of packages. With respect to
“irregularly shaped packages,” Shippers are advised to “[t]reat the irregularly
Case 5:06-cv-04686-IPJ Document 42-2 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 10 of 29
10
shaped package as if it were a regular rectangular box,” and to “[m]easure the
length, width and height of the package from its extreme points.”
46. UPS further instructs Shippers: “For each measurement, round any
fraction to the nearest whole number (for example 1.00 to 1.49 will be considered
1, and 1.50 to 1.99 will considered 2).” That instruction applies whether
measuring for cubic size or for length plus girth.
47. In addition, in calculating dimensional weight (the “cubic size”
divided by 194), Shippers are instructed to “increase any fraction to the next
pound.”
48. These dimensions are the key to all the various dimension-based
charges discussed above; once the Shipper determines the size, length and width,
computer software determines, among other things, the “billable weight” and
whether any size-based surcharges or exclusions are mandated.
49. Plaintiffs have followed the UPS Retail Rate and Service Guide in
determining the dimensions of a package as have many thousands of Shippers.
50. Indeed, some Shippers and Class Members are in the business of
shipping packages, and they have no incentive to undercharge their customers as
undercharging their customer would cut directly into their profits.
51. Once those Class Members have determined the proper charges, they
collect the charges from their customers. If UPS “adjusts” the charges upwards,
Class Members have no way of recouping the resulting charges from their
customers.
52. In fact, to further efforts to ensure that Shippers enter the correct
measurements—and thereby avoid increased charges from UPS—many Shippers
pre-program their software to automatically generate the measurements of
packages they typically use for Shipping. UPS publishes on its web page a
document entitled “Avoid Shipping Charge Corrections” in which it encourages
Case 5:06-cv-04686-IPJ Document 42-2 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 11 of 29
11
Shippers to pre-program their package sizes, and in some instances UPS assists
those Shippers to do so. Thus, for example, when Shippers repeatedly use likesized
packages, UPS encourages or will pre-program that Shipper’s software so
that the Shipper does not need to repeatedly enter (or measure) packages they send.
However, and despite those efforts, as a result of UPS’s Multiple Dimension
Measuring Devices, members of the Class that took advantage of this preprogramming
were still often assessed adjusted charges by UPS because those
devices improperly measured the packages.
D. UPS Re-Measures Packages Using A Different Methodology Than The
Methodology It Mandates For Class Members And Frequently Adjusts
The Measurements In Its Own Favor
53. When the shipped package arrives at a UPS hub, UPS remeasures
each package using its Multiple Dimension Measuring Devices. Based on its
measurement, UPS often “adjusts” the charges upward from those assessed by the
Shipper and these “adjustments” are reflected when UPS invoices the Shipper.
54. Even a small error can have severe consequences since, as discussed
above, UPS instructs Shippers to “round up” at .50 inches and to “round down” at
.49. Thus, a difference as small as one-hundreth of an inch can result in a
“rounding up” of a single dimension of a package (either the height, length or
width), with significant results to the Shipper. For example, for a package with
true dimensions of 43” in length, 23.49” in height, and 20” in width:
True Dimensions
43 x 23.49 x 20
True Dimensional weight
(domestic)
101.96 lbs
Charged at 102 lbs
True Length + Girth
129 inches
Charged at OS 2 rate
Erroneous Dimensions
(addition of .01 inch to
height)
43 x 23.50 x 20
Case 5:06-cv-04686-IPJ Document 42-2 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 12 of 29
12
Erroneous Dimensional
weight (domestic)
106.39 lbs
Charged at at 107 lbs
Erroneous Length + Girth
131 inches
Charged at OS 3 plus Large
Package Surcharge
55. UPS’s measuring devices may make an erroneous calculation for any
one of several reasons.
56. First, on information and belief, UPS’s measuring devices are, at best,
only accurate to within 1/5 of an inch, or 1/10 of an inch, and are not accurate to
within 1/100 of an inch. For this reason alone, UPS’s measuring devices are not fit
for the purpose for which UPS uses them.
57. Second, if the package has a “bulge” in the center, UPS’s measuring
devices will come up with longer dimensions than the Shipper, who measures
along the edge of the package in keeping with UPS’s instructions in the Rates and
Services Guide. Moreover, many “bulges” develop in between the time the
Shipper measures the package and the time UPS re-measures the package at its
hub.
58. Third, the Multiple Dimension Measuring Devices may be improperly
calibrated or otherwise improperly maintained. It is impossible for state and local
Weights and Measures department to ascertain whether the machines are properly
maintained since UPS takes the position that it is immune from state regulation in
this area.
59. Finally, the packages are placed by employees on fast-moving
conveyor belts; if the package is not properly placed, the resulting measurement
may be inaccurate.
60. To make matters worse, the inaccurate measurements are performed
by UPS at a time and place that make it virtually impossible for Plaintiffs and
putative Class Members to challenge the inaccurate measurements.
Case 5:06-cv-04686-IPJ Document 42-2 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 13 of 29
13
61. Because of the flaws in the Multiple Dimension Measuring Devices,
and because they measure packages in a different manner than that which UPS
mandates for Shippers, it is improper and unfair to use the laser measurement as a
basis for adjusting the Shippers’ invoices in UPS’s favor.
62. UPS has systematically rebilled Plaintiffs and members of the Class
based on its inaccurate measuring system. This has cost Plaintiffs as much as
hundreds of dollars on a monthly basis.
63. On information and belief, UPS only uses the faulty laser
measurements to its own advantage. UPS does not, for example, provide a credit
to Shippers when the Multiple Dimension Measuring Devices measure a package’s
dimensions at less than the actual measurements.
E. Attempting to Dispute Adjustments is Futile
64. The Shipper only becomes aware of the “adjustment” when it receives
its invoice from UPS. By that time, unless the package was lost or returned, it is
extremely difficult, and often impossible, for the Shipper to contest the charges,
particularly when the Shipper no longer has access to the specific package shipped.
65. Since the introduction of the Multiple Dimension Measuring Devices,
Plaintiffs and Class Members have often complained about UPS’s “adjustments,”
with limited to no success.
66. Some Shippers were told in January of 2007 or thereafter that UPS
would withdraw its price adjustment as a one-time “courtesy;” after that, UPS’s
standard response has been that the lasers are infallible and no adjustments will be
made.
67. Other Shippers were instructed that only two adjustments per 180 day
period are permitted. This is unconscionable given that many Shippers receive
many small adjustments in weekly invoices. These charges can amount to
Case 5:06-cv-04686-IPJ Document 42-2 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 14 of 29
14
hundreds of dollars a month, and according to UPS’s policy they cannot be
contested once two adjustments have been made.
68. It is difficult and frustrating for Shippers to contest adjustments to
their bills. UPS’s vague and unclear policies are not clearly communicated to
Shippers. Shippers are required to endure lengthy and cirquitous phone calls being
transferred from one customer service agent to another.
69. In some instances, UPS responded to Shippers’ complaints by placing
them on a “no adjustments” list which prevented those Shippers from having any
further overcharges refunded or otherwise cleared, further rendering futile any
effort to contest the overcharge.
F. UPS Is Aware That Its Measuring System Is Inaccurate
70. The inaccuracies of the UPS system is known to UPS and has recently
been criticized by its own Franchisees:
Platinum Shield Association Says United Parcel Service
Charges Unfairly Because of Improper Measurements of
Packages
Monday April 30, 1:53 pm ET
NEW YORK, April 30 /PRNewswire/ -- Officials of the
Platinum Shield Association (PSA), whose members own
and operate United Parcel Service (NYSE: UPS - News)
franchises across the United States under the Mail Boxes
Etc. brand, charged today that UPS imposes higher
shipping costs on franchisees due to UPS’ manipulation
of the dimensional weight system used to determine
package size and weight for shipping.
‘This is significant, because the franchisees find it almost
impossible to dispute the increased costs with UPS once
the package is in UPS’ control,’ said Joe Wightman, a
UPS/MBE franchisee in New York. “More importantly,
we believe this situation may affect all UPS shipping
customers,” he added.
Wightman quoted a recent memo the UPS Store Area
Franchise Developer sent to UPS franchises, which
confirmed that UPS is changing the shipping weight of
Case 5:06-cv-04686-IPJ Document 42-2 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 15 of 29
15
packages: “If you as a franchisee are being hit with
substantial UPS billing adjustments for restated
dimensions of your store's shipments, and you are
convinced that your original dimensions are accurate ...
Look carefully at your bill to see if UPS changes the
dimensions of these boxes and increases the billed
amount based upon their laser scanning based audit.”
Wightman pointed out that this places the franchisees in
an impossible position, because they are in dispute with
their shipping vendor, which also owns their franchise.
Wightman characterized the issue as an inexcusable
abuse of UPS franchisees, many of whom are already in
an unprofitable circumstance. “UPS scans the packages
with its own lasers after the box is out of our hands and
then restates the charges. How is this equitable? Our
experience suggest that the restating of shipping costs to
higher levels results from the impact of packages being
deformed after being piled on each other by UPS during
transit and not by any conscious measurement errors by
the franchisees. How can UPS justify such a practice?”
Wightman added that his organization, PSA, believes
Federal and state government agencies should intervene
to insure shipping consumers that the amount they are
being charged is fair and accurate.
71. UPS representatives have also acknowledged that the measurement
system may be inaccurate.
G. Illustrative Examples of UPS’s Faulty Measurement System
72. The following examples of Plaintiffs experiences illustrate the
damages caused by UPS’s faulty measurement system and the need for UPS to
reform the system.
73. Plaintiff Berg designs and sells, among other things, strollers. Berg
orders custom made boxes to ship its products to customers. One particular box,
the triple box, was designed to fit at the upper cusp of UPS’s OS 2 billing rate in
order to avoid the Large Package Surcharge imposed on those subject to the OS 3
rates.
Case 5:06-cv-04686-IPJ Document 42-2 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 16 of 29
16
74. For many years UPS erroneously charged Berg OS 3 rates for
shipping the triple box, plus a Large Package Surcharge. At one point, UPS issued
Berg a rubber stamp he was to use in order to avoid these errors. That stamp read,
in part: “ATTEN: This pkg., when shipped, met UPS standard size requirements
not exceeding 130” in length & girth combined.”
75. Berg’s problems with UPS’s overcharges of the triple box increased in
2005 and 2006. Despite using the same boxes for years, UPS continued to
overcharge Berg’s shipments. Many of Berg’s invoices show that the incorrect
overcharges were a result of UPS’s incorrect measurement of one side of the
package by as little as one inch. Indeed, over the course of one particular nine
month period, UPS measured the same box, containing the same product, with at
least 8 different measurement combinations.
76. Berg frequently complained to his account representative about the
overcharges. In response, UPS occasionally reversed the overcharges and often
times ignored the complaints. UPS sent representatives to Berg’s business to
program his package sizes into UPS’s software but the improper overcharges
continued. Ultimately, in response to Berg’s complaints, UPS placed Berg on a
“No Adjustments” list meaning UPS would no longer adjust any alleged incorrect
charges made to Berg, despite his objections or complaints.
77. In reviewing actual bills received by Plaintiff Persepolis Enterprises, a
franchise owner of a “UPS Store,” there are many instances of packages that were
measured by the franchise owner in accordance with UPS directions and then later
being rebilled or adjusted by UPS as a larger package.
78. A few examples are as follows:
DATE MEASURED BY
FRANCHISE OWNER
MEASURED BY
UPS LASER
AMOUNT CHARGED
BACK TO OWNER
5/30/06
15X11X11
17X16X16
$12.63
Case 5:06-cv-04686-IPJ Document 42-2 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 17 of 29
17
8/3/06
52X24X14
51X27X14
$31.43
11/27/06
20X12X12
20X20X20
$3.52
12/18/06
20x20x12
20X20X13
$3.64
2/12/07
30X30X8
30X30X10
$4.22
2/16/07
22X15X7
22X16X8
$4.42
79. The above table was constructed from a random sampling of dozens
of charge back amounts from just one of over 4,000 UPS stores. The amounts
charged for all other UPS account holders is unknown at this time, but certainly
have the probability of cumulatively running into the millions of dollars.
V. CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS
80. Plaintiffs bring this action pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 on behalf of
a Class defined as:
All U.S. persons and entities who either (i) own and
operate United Parcel Service (“UPS”) franchises under
the Mail Boxes, Etc. and UPS store brands, or (ii) own
and operate “Third Party Retailers” of UPS shipping
services (which includes Authorized Shipping Outlets,
UPS Alliance Locations located in Staples and Office
Depot retail locations, and Commercial Counters) or (iii)
have accounts with UPS and have received an upward
adjustment from UPS based on UPS’s remeasurement of
a package.
81. Excluded from this Class are (a) Defendant and any entity in which
Defendant has a controlling interest, and its legal representatives, officers,
Case 5:06-cv-04686-IPJ Document 42-2 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 18 of 29
18
directors, assignees and successors, (b) any co-conspirators, and (c) any
governmental entities. Also excluded from the Class is any judge or justice to
whom this action is assigned, together with any relative of such judge or justice
within the third degree of relationship, and the spouse of any such person.
82. The Class consists of hundreds of thousands of individuals or entities
throughout the United States, making individual joinder impractical, in satisfaction
of Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(1). The disposition of the claims of the Class Members in
a single class action will provide substantial benefits to all parties and to the Court.
83. The claims of the representative Plaintiffs are typical of the claims of
the Class, as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(3), in that the representative
Plaintiffs are entities who, like all Class Members, regularly ship packages and
were subject to a UPS billing adjustment. Such representative Plaintiffs, like all
Class Members, have been damaged by Defendants’ misconduct.
84. The factual and legal bases of Defendants’ misconduct are common to
all members of the Class and represent a common thread of misconduct resulting in
injury to Plaintiffs and all members of the Class.
85. There are many questions of law and fact common to the Class and
those questions predominate over any questions that may affect individual Class
Members, within the meaning of Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(2) and 23(b)(3). Common
questions of law and fact include, but are not limited to, the following:
(a) Whether UPS uses Multiple Dimension Measuring
Devices as part of a system of “remeasuring” packages it receives
from Shippers;
(b) Whether the “remeasuring” system is inaccurate, and
appropriate for the purpose for which it is used by UPS;
(c) Whether UPS has systematically adjusted bills or
accounts based on this system;
(d) Whether “adjustment” to bills based on that system are
lawful;
Case 5:06-cv-04686-IPJ Document 42-2 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 19 of 29
19
(e) The amount of damages owing to the Class; and
(f) whether and to what extent injunctive or other equitable
relief is available.
86. Certification is also appropriate under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(2)
because UPS’ Measurement Overcharge Scheme has impacted the Class in a
similar fashion such that final injunctive relief or corresponding declaratory
relief with respect to the Class as a whole is appropriate.
COUNT I
VIOLATIONS OF 18 U.S.C. § 1962(C)
87. Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated,
reallege and incorporate herein by reference each of the allegations contained in
the preceding paragraphs of this Amended Complaint.
88. Plaintiffs, the members of the Class, and the Defendants are
“persons,” as that term is defined in 18 U.S.C. § 1961(3).
89. The following manufacturers of the Multiple Dimension Measurement
Devices used by Defendants are each “persons,” as that term is defined in 18
U.S.C. § 1961(3): (a) Mettler, Toledo, Inc., headquartered are in Columbus, Ohio;
(b) Sick AG, whose North American headquarters are in Minneapolis, Minnesota;
and (c) Quantronix, Inc., headquartered in Farmington, Utah. These entities, as
well as all other manufacturers of Multiple Dimension Measuring Devices used by
UPS, are sometimes collectively referred to herein as “the Manufacturers.”
90. At all relevant times, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c), the
Defendants conducted the affairs of certain association-in-fact enterprises
identified herein, the affairs of which affected interstate commerce through a
pattern of racketeering activity.
Case 5:06-cv-04686-IPJ Document 42-2 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 20 of 29
20
The UPS-Manufacturer Enterprises
91. The RICO “enterprises” are associations-in-fact consisting of (a) one
of the Manufacturers of the Multiple Dimension Measuring Devices used by UPS,
and (b) UPS, including its directors, employees and agents. These associations-infact
are sometimes collectively referred to herein as the “UPS-Manufacturer-
Enterprises.” Each of the UPS-Manufacturer Enterprises is an ongoing and
continuing business organization consisting of both corporations and individuals
that are and have been associated for the common or shared purposes of (a)
disseminating and using Multiple Dimension Measuring Devices for the
measurement of the Class Members’ packages and (b) deriving profits from these
activities. Each of the enterprises had a common purpose of perpetuating the use
of Multiple Dimension Measuring Devices for the measurement of Class
Members’ packages so as to maximize the profits of the participants in the
enterprises. UPS has this as a purpose because it profits from the use of devices,
which (i) result in false overcharges to Plaintiffs and the Class; and (ii) allow UPS
to remeasure huge numbers of packages in a very short period of time with a
minimal number of employees. The Manufacturers have this as a purpose because
they desire to sell as many of their devices to UPS as they can, regardless of
whether or not the machines are sufficiently accurate for the purpose for which
they are used by UPS. In short, each of the participants in the UPS-Manufacturer
Enterprises has the common purpose of making money.
92. The Manufactures were willing participants in the Enterprises, shared
a common purpose with UPS, and agreed to a structure wherein UPS made
decisions as to which Multiple Dimension Measuring Devices would be purchased,
the manner in which they would be used, and the software with which they would
interface to generate invoices making “adjustments” to the charges assessed by
Case 5:06-cv-04686-IPJ Document 42-2 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 21 of 29
21
Shippers. This structure was the basis in which each of the enterprises was
structured and its affairs conducted.
93. The UPS-Manufacturer Enterprises are identified as follows:
(a) The UPS – Mettler, Toledo Enterprise
(b) The UPS—Sick, AG Enterprise
(c) The UPS—Quantronix, Inc. Enterprise
94. The UPS-Manufacturer Enterprises also include all other
manufacturers of Multiple Dimension Measuring Devices used by UPS.
UPS’s Use of the U.S. Mails and Interstate Wire Facilities
95. UPS engaged in and affected interstate commerce because it engaged
in the following activities across state boundaries: The transmission of false and
misleading invoices and invoice “adjustments” based on inaccurate measurements
made by Multiple Dimension Measuring Devices; and the collection of monies
based on the same.
96. During the Class Period, the UPS Defendants’ illegal conduct and
wrongful practices were carried out by an array of employees, working across state
boundaries, who necessarily relied upon frequent transfers of documents and
information, products, and funds by the U.S. mails and interstate wire facilities.
97. The nature and pervasiveness of the Measurement Overcharge
Scheme, which was orchestrated out of UPS’s corporate headquarters, necessarily
required headquarters to communicate directly and frequently by the U.S. mails
and by interstate wire facilities with the various regional facilities and “hubs”
where the measurement of Class Members’ packages occurs. In addition, UPS
representatives used U.S. mails and interstate wire facilities to communicate with
Plaintiffs and members of the Class about the improper overcharges.
98. The precise locations of Defendants’ “hubs,” and dates of Defendants’
uses of the U.S. mails and interstate wire facilities (and corresponding RICO
Case 5:06-cv-04686-IPJ Document 42-2 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 22 of 29
22
predicate acts of mail and wire fraud) are known to UPS, and are so voluminous
that they cannot be alleged without access to these Defendants’ books and records.
However, Plaintiffs can generally describe the occasions on which the RICO
predicate acts of mail fraud and wire fraud occurred, and how those acts were in
furtherance of the UPS’s Scheme, and do so below.
99. The Defendants’ use of the U.S. mails and interstate wire facilities to
perpetrate the Measurement Overcharge Scheme involved millions of
communications throughout the Class Period including, inter alia:, (a) UPS’s
sending of invoices containing false invoices and “adjustments” based on the
dimensional measurements recorded at its hubs by the Multiple Dimension
Measuring Devices; (b) Written and oral communications with Plaintiffs and Class
Members who complained about the overcharges; (c) Written and oral
communications from headquarters to regional facilities and hubs directing the
responses to customers who complain about the overcharges; (d) Written and oral
communications directed to state regulatory agencies, UPS’s franchisee
association, and news media that fraudulently misrepresented the Multiple
Dimension Measuring Devices were accurate and proper for the use to which they
are put by UPS; and (e) Receipts of money sent on tens of thousands of occasions
through the U.S. mails and interstate wire facilities – the wrongful proceeds of the
Measurement Overcharge Scheme.
Conduct of the RICO Enterprises’ Affairs
100. During the Class Period, UPS exerted control over the UPSManufacturer
Enterprises and, in violation of Section 1962(c) of RICO, UPS has
conducted or participated in the conduct of the affairs of those RICO enterprises,
directly or indirectly, in the following ways:
Case 5:06-cv-04686-IPJ Document 42-2 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 23 of 29
23
(a) UPS has determined which Multiple Dimension Measuring
Devices it will purchase, and which software it will use to interface with
those devices;
(b) UPS has directly controlled the manner in which the
measurement devices are used, including, inter alia, how the machines will
be installed, maintained and calibrated, how the personnel using the devices
will be trained, and how charges will be assessed to Shippers;
(c) UPS and its employees have full control over the operation of
the measurement devices;
(d) UPS has controlled and participated in the affairs of the UPSManufacturer
Enterprises by using a fraudulent scheme to measure packages
and bill Shippers, including implementation of a rate structure that facilitated
the goals of the Measurement Overcharge Scheme; and
(e) Each of the Manufacturers has allowed UPS to exert control
over the Enterprises knowing that UPS was using their measurement devices
in an inappropriate and fraudulent manner. Each Manufacturer did so
because the sale of its equipment to UPS was, and is, a major part of its
business.
101. Each of the UPS-Manufacturer Enterprises had a hierarchical
decision-making structure headed by UPS.
102. In violation of Section 1962(c) of RICO, UPS has conducted the
affairs of each of the UPS-Manufacturer Enterprises by assessing charges to
Shippers based upon the false measurements generated by the Multiple Dimension
Measuring Devices.
103. Defendants engaged in the Measurement Overcharge Scheme with the
intent to defraud Plaintiffs and members of the Class. Defendants knowingly
measured packages incorrectly and enforced their rate structure in a manner that
Case 5:06-cv-04686-IPJ Document 42-2 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 24 of 29
24
would enduce Plaintiffs and members of the Class to pay higher rates than their
packages otherwise should have been subject to.
UPS’s Pattern of Racketeering Activity
104. UPS has conducted and participated in the affairs of the abovereferenced
UPS-Manufacturer Enterprises through a pattern of racketeering
activity, including acts that are indictable under 18 U.S.C. § 1341, relating to mail
fraud, and 18 U.S.C. § 1343, relating to wire fraud. UPS’s pattern of racketeering
likely involved millions of separate instances of use of the U.S. mails or interstate
wire facilities in furtherance of the Measurement Overcharge Scheme. Each of
these fraudulent mailings and interstate wire transmissions constitutes a
“racketeering activity” within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 1961(1)(B).
Collectively, these violations constitute a “pattern of racketeering activity,” within
the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 1961(5), in which UPS intended to defraud Plaintiffs
and members of the Class.
105. The Shipping Overcharge Scheme ensured that Plaintiffs and
members of the Class would be over-billed for the packages they shipped with
UPS.
106. Each of the Plaintiffs were assessed, and paid, overcharges based
upon false dimensional measurements based on UPS’s use of Multiple Dimension
Measuring Devices.
107. By intentionally using measurement devices that it knows are
inaccurate and improper for the purposes for which it uses the devices, then billing
Shippers based on the inaccurate measurements, UPS engaged in a fraudulent and
unlawful course of conduct constituting a pattern of racketeering activity.
108. UPS’s racketeering activities amounted to a common course of
conduct, with similar pattern and purpose, intended to deceive Plaintiffs and
members of the Classes. Each separate use of the U.S. mails and/or interstate wire
Case 5:06-cv-04686-IPJ Document 42-2 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 25 of 29
25
facilities employed by UPS was related, had similar intended purposes, involved
similar participants and methods of execution, and had the same results affecting
the same victims, including Plaintiffs and members of the Classes.
Damages Caused by UPS’s Shipping Overcharge Scheme
109. UPS’s violations of federal law and its pattern of racketeering activity
has directly and proximately caused Plaintiffs and members of the Class to be
injured in their business or property because Plaintiffs and members of the Classes
have paid many millions of dollars in improper overcharges based upon UPS’s use
of Multiple Dimension Measuring Devices.
110. UPS sent billing statements through the U.S. mails or by interstate
wire facilities in furtherance of their Shipping Overcharge Scheme. Plaintiffs and
members of the Class have made inflated payments for Shipping based on and/or
in reliance on false measurements.
111. On information and belief, UPS continues to measure packages using
imperfect Multiple Dimension Measuring Devices and to apply a rate structure
designed to allow UPS to take advantage of those imperfections in order to collect
improper overcharges from its customers. UPS continues to improperly
overcharge members of the Class for shipping charges. These ongoing violations
of RICO continue to harm members of the Class in that, among other things,
franchise owners and Third Party Retailers are unable to recoup these additional
costs from clients and UPS acts to make efforts to complain or contest the
overcharges futile. Individual account holders are equally harmed in that UPS acts
to make their efforts to complain or contest the overcharges futile and, frequently,
those Class Members no longer have access to the packages once shipped.
Accordingly, Plaintiffs and members of the Class seek appropriate injunctive
relief, without which UPS will continue to engage in the above-described illegal
conduct.
Case 5:06-cv-04686-IPJ Document 42-2 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 26 of 29
26
112. Under the provisions of Section 1964(c) of RICO, UPS is liable to
Plaintiffs and members of the Class for three times the damages that Plaintiffs and
the Class Members have sustained, plus the costs of bringing this suit, including
reasonable attorneys’ fees.
COUNT II
BREACH OF CONTRACT
113. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the preceding allegations as if fully
set forth herein.
114. UPS’ Multiple Dimension Measuring Devices incorrectly measured
and continue to incorrectly measure packages shipped by Plaintiffs and members
of the Class, resulting in measurements greater than the packages’ true
measurements. UPS charges and continues to charge Plaintiffs and members of the
Class higher rates based on those incorrect measurements including, frequently,
“large package” charges.
115. Throughout the Class period, Plaintiffs and members of the Class
were contractually obligated to pay shipping rates as set out in the rate and service
guide and under UPS’s published rate structures. At the same time, UPS was
contractually obligated to charge no more than those same rates, to deal with
Plaintiffs and the Class Members in good faith and fairly, and to properly and
accurately measure packages using an adequate, properly calibrated, and tested
method with sufficiently low tolerances.
116. UPS had a contractual obligation to honor and accept as correct the
weight or size of packages that were correctly measured based on the UPS Rate
and Service Guide.
117. In measuring any package, UPS’s measurements would have to be
determined using the same instructions that the Class Members are required to use.
Case 5:06-cv-04686-IPJ Document 42-2 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 27 of 29
27
118. Moreover, UPS has an obligation to deal fairly and in good faith with
its Shippers. This obligation includes, at a minimum, (1) ensuring that Shippers
rights are considered and protected; and (2) using only accurate, properly
maintained measurement devices that are (3) suitable for the purpose for which
UPS uses the devices.
119. UPS has breached its obligation to Shippers.
120. As a result, Shippers have been damaged.
VI. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully prays as follows:
A. Certification of the Class pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(2) and/or
(b)(3);
B. For judgment against Defendant on its claims together with an award
of all damages available under such laws;
C. Treble damages pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1964(c);
D. Preliminary and permanent injunctions enjoining UPS from any
further racketeering activity;
E. Appropriate attorney’s fees, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1964; and
F. For such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper to
remedy Defendant’s unjust enrichment.
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 38(b), Plaintiffs demands a trial
by jury on all issues so triable.
DATED: _____________________, 2007.
Case 5:06-cv-04686-IPJ Document 42-2 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 28 of 29
28
/s/ David R. Donaldson
David R. Donaldson
DONALDSON & GUIN, LLC
505 North 20th Street, Suite 1000
Birmingham, Al 35203
Telephone: (205) 226-2282
Facsimile: (205-226-2357
Of Attorneys for Plaintiffs in Intervention
OF COUNSEL:
Steve W. Berman
Andrew M. Volk
Genessa A. Stout
HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP
1301 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2900
Seattle, WA 98101
Telephone: (206) 623-7292
Facsimile: (206) 623-0594
Steve D. Larson
Christina Beatty-Walters
Joshua L. Ross
STOLL STOLL BERNE LOKTING & SHLACHTER P.C.
209 S.W. Oak Street, Fifth Floor
Portland, Oregon 97204
Telephone: (503) 227-1600
Facsimile: (503) 227-6840
Craig A. Nichols
David R. Kracke
NICHOLS & ASSOCIATES
4614 S.W. Kelly Avenue, Suite 200
Portland, Oregon 97239
Telephone: (503) 224-3018
Facsimile: (503) 222-0693
Case 5:06-cv-04686-IPJ Document 42-2 Filed 09/24/2007 Page 29 of 29

Re: The UPS Store, Tales of Gore

I have just walked away from my UPS store and my $225,000 investment. I implore anyone considering an investment in this franchise to look elsewhere. The financial, emotional and personal losses are horrendous. Please do not make the same mistake I did.

Juan F's picture

CEO Mike Escew of UPS on American Idol

I missed this episode of American Idol but someone on YouTube managed to tape it. So without further comment, here is the CEO of United Parcel Service, Mike Escew, appearing on American Idol to croon and persuade.

Buying UPSS

Don't buy any franchise with an FOC which allows the franchisor to come in after 10 years and buy your entire business for the then current market value of the fixtures in the store.

In otherwords you pay $200k for a store and in 10 years they can buy it for what your fixtures are worth maybe $10-20k if you are lucky.

I would like to join the class action suit

I live in California. I was shipping my packages happily, with the exception that a previous UPS Driver assaulted me in my home and stole money from me. Recently, I'm getting additional charges for packages that are not measured correctly. I weigh and measure all my packages and all of a sudden, I'm getting additional charges.

*****SO...I now mark ever package at 1 pound and the size at 4x4x4. I'm curious to see how this will play out. I'm tired of calling for credits. They've been adding 1 inch to each side of my boxes and sometimes, it throws me into an oversize package category.

The UPS Store Franchise

3 Words sum up this franchise!!! RUN LIKE HELL

SATISFACTION EQUALS......

Not Owning A UPS Store :)

UPS Stores?

Who Knows if these UPS Stores are still open and operational?

KAREN SINGER - UPS - PALO ALTO, CA
Since opening her store in July 2003, Singer has continued to use SCORE’s counseling. “I meet with my current SCORE counselor, John Edwards, on a monthly basis to discuss operational issues,” Singer states. “John has helped me become a better manager. He’s impressed on me how important it is to train, develop and motivate my employees. He’s worked with me on setting objectives and advised me on how to deal with sensitive personnel issues. Because of his help, I believe I have one of the best teams of associates in The UPS Store system,” she adds.

Singer is very proud that her store achieved cash break-even the first full month in business. The business became profitable within the first six months of operation. “When the Store became profitable, I stopped asking my husband for an allowance,” she quips. Singer’s Store has won the Bronze Award from MBE/UPS for the past three years for reaching gross revenues over $375,000 per year. Singer hopes to earn a Silver Award in 2007 for gross revenues over $425,000. “Best of all,” she proudly proclaims, “in December 2006, I paid off the remainder of the $250,000 loan I had taken out to open the Store.”

TOM SCHERWITZ - UPS STORE #4997 - San Antonion, TX
Tom Scherwitz of San Antonio, Texas, never planned on running his own business. But after enduring two corporate downsizings, it seemed the best alternative to finding another job in a distant city that would require a long commute or uprooting his family.

But with so many possibilities and pitfalls associated with being a small business owner, Tom was venturing into unfamiliar territory.

Fortunately, he didn’t have to look far for help. His father-in-law, Hap Appleman, a former business owner, was also a SCORE volunteer counselor. After discussing Tom’s experience, skills and interests, they decided to investigate the world of franchising. Hap recommended that Tom contact The Entrepreneur’s Source, a consulting firm that performs advance screening services for many regional and national franchisers.

DAVID DIAZ - UPS STORE - CONGERS, NY
David Diaz, owner of "The UPS Store" in Congers did not have that luxury. He had been a Broadcast Technician at a major TV network in New York City for 27 years and had to work in a dark room without windows editing TV News film and video tape, and most of the time under heavy pressure and tight deadlines. As he describes it, "I had no life! I worked most weekends, had little time for vacation and never saw my children".

The UPS Store

Nothing But FRAUD! FRAUD! FRAUD! Run like hell if you want to keep your 401k, house,cars, wife, kids!

600 drop offs per---tell me where and I will open a store there.

600 drop off packages per day is unrealistic. Possible? unlikely

Please call me

I own a UPS Store and am so disappointed at the franchisor and his unethical tactics. I would like to sue him but would like some feedback from a former franchisee. Please contact me at 4802028636

Re: ups store

A business is only worth twice as much as their profit last year, in a good market possibly 3 times, so if it takes home 90k you shouldn't pay over 270k for it.

Closure List

You should see Candy Bouquet Internationals list.of closures, doubles UPS. 

Totally UNREAL!!!

Short-timer

want a store cheap

You can buy me out ed 3188616014

4997. open Congers.

4997. open
Congers. Open
Palo Alto. Open

Is The UPS Store Really That Bad???

Is owning a UPS Store really that bad??I will be meeting with them next week for deposit payment for a franchise...Should i continue????

You are lucky

I also walked away from my ups store and my investment of $242k. I also lost 3 full years of saving since there were no paychecks. All that i gain from this nightmare was two years of mental and financial devestation. Just imagine 30 years of being in the working word,able to save the money to be your own boss only to be bamboozled by corp greed in the form of What Can Brown Do For You! What a pile of BROWN.

Never said there weren't some successful UPS Stores

If this post is from SCORE, it was never indicated that there weren't successful and break-even The UPS Stores. Of course, there are.

It is just that the odds are 35% more or less, nobody knows for sure, of failing and losing your investment, or failing to realize breakeven and profits.

If you do work for SCORE, I would suggest that you consider all the transfers in addition to the terminations in the UPS UFOC in Item 20 to be failures and then look at the SBA Rate and the litigation against MBE-UPS before you help Veterans to get into a UPS Store under the Patriot Express Loan Initiative.

If Vets and their spouses want to invest in a The UPS Store at a 35% more or less failure rate and are aware of this, and are aware of the litigation, etc.. against MBE-UPS, it's a free country. The failure rate of the stores is not truly indicated by the SBA Loan Default Rate, and the true rate of failure is not required to be disclosed under law.

I am happy that your clients succeeded and are so happy but it doesn't change the fact that so many The UPS Stores have failed or so many are barely breaking even and teetering on failure. Unfortunately, there is more pain and suffering in this Network than there is joy and satisfaction.

UPS SCREWPLES

It is pretty evident that UPS is an equal opportunity scam corporation. This company has zero morals or integrity, only greedy intentions on every walk of life.

UPS Store Equals- - -

Totally Failed Business Model...RUN FORREST RUN

You asked me to poke holes

>>i would scan the boxes it would take an employee approx 2 hours a day
i would as the store owner make 600 x 1.10 x 25 days a month approx $15,000 per
month minus an extra employee cost at $1,500 to scan and royalties at $1,100.00

i would net over $10,000 per month.

please poke holes in this theory as i want to buy a store asap.

thanks
again<<

1. No way could an employee scan and stack 600 boxes in 2 hours a day, just not possible.

2. You indicate that you own another business that generates 600 boxes a day. If this is true, how are you going to move these boxes from your current location to the store? You do understand that you must have a store that is compliant with all UPS rules and it must be open 58 hours a week, yes?

3. You will have to pay substantial rent on this store, that cuts into your profit. You will have to pay utilities.

4. You will have no choice but to deal with the public, once you have a store, your employee will have to answer the phone, deal with the walk-ins who haven't a clue how to fill out the forms, seal the package etc. This will disrupt the rhythm of your employee scanning 600 boxes. Maybe so much disruption that your packages from your primary business will not get out on time.

5. You can't do it with one employee. Laws require breaks and lunch periods. You have to have employees on duty, greeting every customer within 5 seconds of the time they pass through the front door. You may need 4 employees to properly staff to cover the 58 hours open time plus the before and after preparation, cleaning, accounting, etc. etc.

6. Even with the requisite number of employees, some will get sick, fail to show up or quit. Then you will have to work in the store yourself to make sure your service is compliant. More time away from your primary business.

7. You will be required to buy or lease other equipment, provide other services and pay for the "support technology" to cover those required services.

Bottom line, your $10,000 profit might quickly shrink to about $0. And you will have tied up $150,000 in capital that you could have invested in other ways!

UPS STORE REALITY

Do yourself a favor and dont allow yourself to recieve this years #1 STUPID AWARD for what you may think is a bargin. This franchise is an abortion and top honor for that goes to the UPS SCAM ARTISTS IN ATLANTA.

michael webster's picture

ABIL Write-Off

I am surprised by how many ex-franchisee don't know about this provision in Canadian Tax Code. 

Michael Webster PhD LLB
Franchise News

Remember! All UPS Store prospects! Especially Vets

When you look at The UPS Store 2007 Uniform Franchise Offering Circular, count the transfers as failures as well as the terminations and the acquisitions ---just to be safe. Check the failure rate of the SBA Loans for The UPS Store (here on Blue Mazu Mau) and then find the real failure rate of the franchised business plan bv combining the termination, transfer, and acquisition columns together. This computation should provide you with the odds of success or failure in buying a The UPS Store.

Remember, the SBA failure rate is misleading and this is why the Fran/Vet, VA/SBA alliance that presents the appearance of endorsing The UPS Store will work against veterans now and in the future who negotiate loans from the SBA. Pass the word!

The problem is....

The UPS Stores don't make a dime. RUN RUN RUN. Switch to FedEx

RUN -

RUN - Run anywhere but The UPS Store. Too many have lost everything, do not let yourself become one of them. The UPS Store is a money pit!
Drop-Off volumes are going through the roof while stores are closing across the country - RUN - put your money in cans buried in the backyard - you'll be glad you did.

Somebody gave you a line!

I own a mail boxes etc. and my discounts are only 6 1/2% on residential ground and between 8 and 15% on commercial depending upon weight.

You are getting 14% off a published rate while the UPS Stores are charged retail rate less a percent which is maybe 45% discount on residential retail at best and a little more than that on commercial and air shipments.

So, you are not comparing apples to apples.

For example if Retail Rate is $12.00 and you got a 45% discount, your net cost would be $6.60 plus about $1 in royalties or $7.60 and you are subject to all kinds of requirements.

If the published rate is $8.50 and you get 14% discount, your net cost is $7.51 and you don't have to maintain a retail store front with all the accompanying costs.

So, things aren't always as they first appear on the surface.

Desperate

Does anyone know a bankruptcy lawyer in the Seattle Washington area or anyone that can help me. Lost everthing! Store opened in November 2006. Struggled from day one. Need someone to handle my proceedings.

Thanks!

Barbara Jorgensen's picture

Nothing is worst

than that feeling of walking away from a dream. A successful business and all the hard work you put into it. To walk away with nothing. I know how you feel.

buying an existing UPS Store DONT DO IT!!!

DO NOT DO IT
You would be better off donating your money to charity, otherwise you will end up donating all of your money and time to the Mathis-Eskew retirement fund.
Bad franchise run by immorale dictatorship

Gator Leasing

Gator leasing is Tamp, Orlando, Jax, south of Tampa but not sure how far. Ken Gordon and Joni Daglar Area Reps.

split the $3.00?

What $3.00? If you are doing 600 packages per day, you are paying for a daily pickup ( $8.00 per week) How would you transport 600 packages to a UPS Store? Where would the store have space to store them, who pays for the labor to scan them? The stores get about $1 for accepting a prepaid package. For this, they must weigh& scan each individual package, transport it to their designated pickup area, and are exposed to insurance and damage liability.

You probably already have better rates than a store owner, so what would you gain? Where does the $3 figure come from?

New Thread to UPS Store Comments --More Gore

With this new thread, will the old thread that started under rhe Canby Research Srory be lost to new posters? How will they access the comments that have already been made about UPS?
As an ex-UPS store owner who lost the entire investment and who is srill trying to pay off bills, there are some questions I would like to ask about the practice of "churning".
When UPS does its UFOC's and indicates stores like us who have gone out of business and sold their assets for almost nothing, are we indicated as just "transfers" in the UFOC and do neither the government nor thne prospective franchisee KNOW that these transfers are FAILURES. Does this mean that the government in the UFOC's and the Federal Rules have no idea of the failure rate of the UPS stores ----and they don't want to know?
Isn't the actual failure rate of the UPS franchise stores being hidden from the government and the franchisees when these failure statistics are presented as "transfers"?
When these failed stores remain visible under new ownership and this is reported in the UFOC, is the visibility of the stores as indicated in Item 20 of the UFOC the basis upon which Entrepeneur and AARP faslsely advertise these stores to the public?
What is the criteria to be in the Top 5 in Entrepeneur and AARP ------Iszn't this a disgrace?

BUYING DEBT

All you get when you invest in a UPS STORE is debt.You start out with the initial investment of $250K and then by the end of your third year you come to realize that you are now in debt for $450K. Do not concern yourself with what will happen at the end of your franchise agreement because you will never make it to that point. If you did you would be out a cool MILLION. You will be begging for UPS to take it for free, nevermind what the assets are worth.

RUN LIKE HELL!!!

The majority of UPS Stores do not start breaking even for 36 months with many
requiring 48 months or more. That does not mean that the owner(s) have made their
money back in 36 months, it means it takes the average store 3 years before the owners
stop putting more money into the store. Unfortunately neither MBE nor the Area
Franchisee tells this to the prospective buyer. Generally, this means that opening a new
store is a bad financial decision!!!!!!!! Vist www.thebrownboard.com

the packages are small they

the packages are small they are holding small boxes of business cards.
i would save $1.1o per package.it would only take a couple of seconds
to scan the labels will already be on the boxes. i would then
split the profits with the owner of 660 per day each would make approx
10k per month???

UPS Store ----Look at the books

Look at his books and his IRS Return on his business for the past few years------Nobody on Blue Mau Mau is going to talk to you on the basis of such flimsy information and if you have not gotten beyond talking to the owner ---let the buyer beware and do your due diligence.
Obviously, there have to be some The UPS Stores who are making profits and this may be one of them, Ascertain and confirm why why the owner wants to sell when he is getting 90K.

FranSynergy's picture

UPS UFOC Here

Click Here 

Believe & Succeed,
Dale
FranSynergy, Inc.
Synergizing Franchising!
www.fransynergy.com

BUYING AN EXISTING UPS STORE ??????? ARE YOU INSANE????

PLEASE DONT TAKE THIS THE WRONG WAY..ARE YOU CRAZY OR JUST REALLY STUPID..NO OFFENSE, BUT BASED ON WHAT ANY BLIND MAN CAN READ ON THIS SITE AND OTHER SITES SUCH AS WWW.TALKBROWN .COM YOU STILL ARE ASKING IF THIS IS A GOOD DEAL...YOU SIR ARE EXACTLY THE TYPE OF FOOL, ER I MEAN FRANCHISEE THAT UPS/MBE WANTS...GOOD LUCK TO YOU AND THE LOSS OF YOUR INVESTMENT WITH UPS/MBE.REMEMBER ITS NOT WHAT CAN BROWN DO FOR YOU,, ITS WHAT WILL BROWN DO TO YOU..AND THE ANSWER IS THEY WILL BEND YOU OVER TILL YOU BLEED OUT YOUR EYES AND SCREW YOU SOME MORE..WANTS TO BUY AN EXISTING UPS STORE LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL

Buying an existing UPS Store --Crystal Ball

Do you have a Crystal Ball?

If you knew that UPS was going to support its namesake and do those things necessary to make the stores profitable, or at least capable of breaking even, you might be making a good buy. UPS is a respected symbol in the World and you know that UPS will be here tomorrow.

Certainly, it is madness to buy a new franchise and build a new store for The UPS Store under today's flawed business model. But, if you can get a store at a great discount and not put a great deal of money at risk, this may be a good deal for you and there could be a ROI for you in the future. There is nothing wrong with UPS's bottom line.

Just depends on what course of action Mr. Eskew will decide is in the best interests of UPS and its shareholders. LET THE BUYER BEWARE.

But if your "sunk costs" are greatly reduced, you might swim.

Did you see Mike Eskew's comments for The UPS Store convention?

Take a look at Janet Spark's report on this board. Eskew acknowledged problems and offered no solutions. I'll translate for you: The ship is sinking and there are no lifeboats. Would you board a sinking ship that has no lifeboats? If so, you have what it takes to be an owner of The UPS Store.

EXISTING UPS STORE PURCHASE ????

Here is your answer plain & simple DO NOT DO IT...DO NOT DO IT...DO NOT DO IT...DO NOT DO IT...GET THE PICTURE ???? AND JUST IN CASE..ONCE AGAIN ...DO NOT DO IT !!!!!!!!!!

do the numbers

$325 + franchise fees + up to spec fees= $350k if you are lucky! Now you business loan into the equation and if you are lucky enough for everything to stay the same your $434k STR will put you at the break even point. THIS IS A BAILOUT FOR THIS STORE OWNER AND EVERYONE IN UPS STORE LAND KNOWS IT! THE POTENTIAL FOR FURTHER GROWTH IS NILLLLLLLLLLLL, NADA, NOOONKA!

FranSynergy's picture

Pak Mail

Right-off-the-bat Pak Mail doesn't have the same problems which UPS Stores are currently faced with. Pak Mail does offer a very nice mix of Consumer & Business Services.

With that said, there is one very profitable seqment of the Pick/Pack/Mail/Ship business which these concepts have yet to pick up on. A market segment which in my opinion would provide the ZEE with a very strong competitive advantage in their market, along with high profitability. I'm not going to just toss the idea out here for everyone --- but anyone seriously considering entering into one of these concepts should prepare a solid business plan and really think about some of the related profit centers in the commercial segment. I would consider sharing the concept with anyone who is serious about the segment, and contacted me by Bluemaumau E-Mail.

Believe & Succeed,
Dale
FranSynergy, Inc.
Synergizing Franchising!
www.fransynergy.com

Mr. Blue MauMau's picture

Breaking News Coming Out Soon

BREAKING: Reporter Janet Sparks has been following-up on this development for several days now. More to come on this shortly...

Mr. Blue MauMau

Post new comment

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.