Detention Rates, Appointment Times, and the Real Cost of Delay

Detention is one of the most misunderstood and misrepresented costs in trucking. Carriers are routinely told that detention is “policy-based,” “capped,” or “subject to customer approval,” as if time, equipment, and labor suddenly lose value once a truck stops moving.

They do not.

When a carrier is held beyond reasonable free time, detention becomes a compensable service, supported by long-standing principles of contract and restitution law. Appointment times, internal policies, and arbitrary caps do not eliminate this obligation. At most, they determine when the clock starts.

Detention Is a Service, Not a Courtesy

When a truck arrives on time and is held at a shipper or consignee, the carrier loses the ability to:

• Generate revenue elsewhere

• Redeploy equipment

• Reassign its driver

• Recover lost hours of service

Despite this, the facility continues to benefit from exclusive control of the truck and driver. At that point, the carrier is no longer simply transporting freight. The carrier is providing standby capacity for the benefit of the facility.

The law does not treat that as free.

The Legal Foundation for Detention Pay

Courts apply quantum meruit and restitution principles to prevent unjust enrichment when services are rendered and accepted without a pre-negotiated price. These principles do not require a written detention rate, only proof that services were rendered, accepted, and had measurable value.

United States ex rel. Modern Electric, Inc. v. Ideal Electric Security Co., Inc.

81 F.3d 240 (D.C. Cir. 1996)

The court held that when one party knowingly accepts the benefit of another’s services, the law implies an obligation to pay the reasonable value of those services, even if no specific rate was agreed to in advance.

Applied to detention: If a facility knowingly holds a truck beyond free time, it accepts the benefit of the carrier’s equipment, labor, and time. That acceptance creates the obligation to pay.

Commerce Partnership 8098 Ltd. v. Equity Contracting Co., Inc.

695 So.2d 383 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

This case outlines the elements of quantum meruit:

1. Valuable services were rendered

2. The services benefited the receiving party

3. The services were accepted

4. Payment was reasonably expected

Extended detention satisfies all four elements in commercial freight transportation.

Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 371

The Restatement allows restitution to be measured by the reasonable value of services rendered, defined as what it would cost the receiving party to obtain those services from someone else in the carrier’s position.

Detention is valued based on cost and replacement, not preference or policy.

What Appointment Times Actually Mean

An appointment time establishes readiness and defines when free time begins, not whether detention is owed. It does not:

• Waive detention pay

• Cap compensation

• Authorize unlimited delay

When a carrier arrives on time for a confirmed appointment and is held beyond reasonable free time, detention is owed. The existence of an appointment strengthens the carrier’s position by proving compliance, not the facility’s defense.

Multi-Day Detention with Appointments

If detention extends into multiple days, each additional day represents continued acceptance of standby services. The obligation to compensate does not disappear overnight.

Multi-day detention increases:

• The measurable value of services rendered

• The opportunity cost to the carrier

• The facility’s notice and responsibility

An appointment does not authorize a facility to warehouse a truck without pay.

Missed Appointments Caused by Prior Detention

When detention at one facility causes a carrier to miss subsequent appointments, the resulting losses are foreseeable and directly connected to the original delay.

Lost revenue, consumed hours-of-service, and equipment unavailability are not speculative damages. They are predictable consequences of detention in an appointment-based system.

How Appointment Abuse Distorts Freight Markets

When detention is unpaid or arbitrarily capped:

• Facilities externalize inefficiency

• Carriers absorb uncompensated time

• Spot rates appear artificially low

• Contract pricing hides true service costs

This distorts market signals and penalizes compliance. Paying detention correctly restores accountability without inflating freight rates.

Example: Realistic Cost of One Day of Detention

Single-truck carrier, one full day detained

Fixed daily overhead

• Truck payment: $175

• Trailer payment: $45

• Insurance: $55

• Permits/plates/compliance: $15

• ELD and compliance tools: $8

• Office/admin allocation: $25

Fixed subtotal: $323/day

Standby costs

• Driver pay or labor value: $300

• Idle/APU fuel: $35

• Maintenance reserve accrual: $30

Standby subtotal: $365/day

Opportunity cost (conservative)

• Lost revenue contribution: $500/day

Total reasonable detention value:$1,188/day, commonly rounded to $1,200/day

A “policy” offer of $500/day often fails to cover even the carrier’s fixed and standby costs, forcing the carrier to subsidize the facility’s delay. Actual detention costs vary by operation, but this example reflects conservative industry averages for a single power unit.

Why Policy Caps Do Not Control

Internal broker or shipper policies do not override:

• Restitution law

• Quantum meruit principles

• The obligation to pay for services accepted

Courts focus on benefit, control, and reasonable value. Not email disclaimers.

The Bottom Line

If a facility controls a truck, it controls the cost of that time. Appointment or not. Policy or not.

Detention is not a penalty. It is the price of delay being assigned to the party that caused it.

The law has supported this for decades. The industry is simply catching up.

If the law already recognizes the value of time, the obvious question becomes why detention abuse persists at all.

Detention as a Modern Regulatory Failure

Detention abuse is not happening because the law is unclear. It is happening because modern trucking regulations refuse to price time.

Federal freight regulation focuses almost entirely on:

• Safety compliance

• Licensing and entry

• Recordkeeping and enforcement mechanisms

What it does not do is assign responsibility for time loss once freight movement begins. That gap allows every other party in the supply chain to treat carrier time as flexible, absorbable, and negotiable after the fact.

The result is predictable:

• Facilities overbook docks with no consequence

• Brokers defer responsibility to “customer policy”

• Carriers are told to absorb the loss as a cost of doing business

None of this is accidental. It is the natural outcome of a system that regulates trucks but not time ownership.

The law already recognizes that time has value. The regulatory framework simply refuses to enforce it.

How Current Regulation Enables Detention Abuse

Modern freight regulation fails in three specific ways:

1. No Mandatory Time Accountability

There is no enforceable federal standard requiring facilities to compensate carriers once reasonable free time expires. Detention becomes “negotiated,” which in practice means denied or capped.

2. No Economic Consequences for Delay

Facilities face no regulatory or financial pressure to improve dock efficiency. The cost of delay is pushed downstream until it lands on the carrier, who has the least leverage and the most exposure.

3. No Separation Between Policy and Liability

Brokers are allowed to hide behind internal policies that have no grounding in restitution law, creating a false belief that policy equals legality.

This is not a market failure. It is a regulatory omission.

Why the Market Cannot Fix Detention on Its Own

Some argue that detention should be “handled by the market.” That argument collapses under inspection.

Carriers cannot:

• Leave without breaching contract

• Reprice mid-load

• Recover lost hours-of-service

• Replace lost time

Facilities, meanwhile, face no downside for delay unless they are forced to pay for it. That imbalance guarantees abuse, regardless of market conditions.

Markets only function when time is priced honestly. Detention abuse proves it is not.

How FOPT Policy Directly Addresses Detention Failure

The Federation of Professional Truckers (FOPT) does not treat detention as a side issue. It treats it as a structural defect in how freight is regulated.

FOPT policy corrects the failure in four key ways.

1. Time Is Recognized as a Billable Service

FOPT policy explicitly recognizes detention and extended on-site delay as compensable standby services, not discretionary charges.

This aligns regulation with existing restitution law by making clear that:

• Once free time expires, compensation is mandatory

• Payment is based on reasonable value, not preference

• Time cannot be taken without consequence

This closes the gap regulators have ignored.

2. Detention Liability Is Assigned at the Point of Control

Under FOPT policy, responsibility follows control, not convenience.

If a facility controls the truck, that facility bears responsibility for the time taken. Brokers cannot deflect liability downstream, and carriers are not forced to chase approval after the damage is done.

This eliminates the “customer says no” shell game.

3. Appointment Times Are Codified, Not Weaponized

FOPT policy treats appointment times as:

• A trigger for readiness

• A clear start point for free time

• Evidence of carrier compliance

They are not treated as waivers, caps, or blanket permissions for delay. This restores appointments to their intended role: coordination, not cost shifting.

4. Detention Is Enforced Through Settlement Integrity

FOPT policy ties detention pay directly to settlement enforcement, requiring:

• Clear documentation of arrival and release times

• Transparent calculation of detention charges

• Prohibition on unilateral caps not agreed to in advance

This removes ambiguity and prevents after-the-fact denials.

Why This Matters Beyond Carriers

Correctly enforcing detention pay:

• Reduces unsafe rushing

• Improves dock efficiency

• Stabilizes scheduling

• Cleans up rate distortion

It does not raise freight rates arbitrarily. It forces inefficiency to be priced where it occurs.

That is how markets are supposed to work.

The Core Difference

Current regulation says: “Figure it out yourselves.”

FOPT policy says: “Time has value. Control creates responsibility. Pay for what you take.”

That is not radical. It is overdue.

Final Reality Check

Detention abuse persists not because carriers lack legal footing, but because regulation refuses to operationalize it.

FOPT policy does exactly that. It translates settled legal principles into enforceable freight practice.

The law already exists. The math already exists. What has been missing is the will to connect them.

That’s the fix. FOPT exists to move these principles from theory into enforceable practice.

This article is for informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice.