Employment Surety Bonds – USDA Proves Their Worth

Written by JoAnn Smith on May 29th, 2014. Posted in Agricultural Bonds, Bond Types, Colorado, Illinois, Performance Bonds, Surety Bond Blog

     employment surety bonds      
Colorado employment surety bonds help agriculture
For anyone in the agricultural sector the recent move by the USDA to invoke an employment surety bond against Liborio Markets #8 Inc. of Colorado for failing to pay monies owed to 14 different sellers on lots of produce is a welcome sign. The decision by the government agency to bar the company from the produce industry until March 2016 is just one in a number of injunctions this company has had for bad business practices. The current problem involves a little over half a million dollars in sales that are owed for agricultural produce that was sold, delivered but never paid for by the company. Unfortunately this is not the first time that a surety bond has been used to try and keep a business in the agricultural industry from defrauding others.

Illinois Employment Surety Bond Holder

On the other side of the country, an Illinois business might find itself in a bit of difficulty because of its hiring practices. It seems that Central Grocers Inc. of Juliett Illinois hired the former president of TJ Produce, Thomas Hanyzewski, who had failed to pay reparation that was awarded to his company. Because of this background, Central Grocer will need to post an employer surety bond that will be held by the USDA for four years. The surety bond is in the amount of $50,000 and will be the companies guarantee to the industry that it will perform according to the rules set down by the Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act or PACA.

Agriculture and Employer Surety Bonds

It is easy to see from these two examples that employer surety bonds are a big part of the agriculture industry. While it is true that most companies will never find themselves on the wrong side of the table when facing the USDA for rule infractions or fraudulent behavior, agriculture dealer bonds and employer surety bonds can ensure that everyone plays fair. That is why it is so important for anyone who is involved with this important industry to get bonded by a company that knows the rules and can be sure they have the right surety bond for their particular situation. BuySurety has been providing employment surety bonds, agricultural dealer bonds and every kind of required surety bond for the agricultural community for over two decades. Drop by our website or give our knowledgeable customer service folks a call and find out just how easy it is to ensure your business, no matter what sector it is in, has the right surety bonds at the best price.

Tags: , ,


Comments Off on Employment Surety Bonds – USDA Proves Their Worth

North Carolina Grain Dealer Bond Updated

Written by JoAnn Smith on May 26th, 2014. Posted in Agricultural Bonds, Commercial Bonds, Latest News, License and Permit Bonds, North Carolina, Popular States, Surety Bond Blog

     grain dealer bond      
New grain dealer bond requirements in the works
Last year’s passage of North Carolina House Bill 383 saw an increase in the amount of the grain dealer bond that would be required as part of the new agricultural licensing requirements. Now in effect, that bill saw the surety bond requirements that are part of the licensing for grain dealers in North Carolina increase substantially.
 
With the implementation of this new law, grain dealer bonds will move from the previous $10,000 surety bond to a $100,000 grain dealer bond.

Who Needs a Grain Dealer Bond?

This new bond amount will be required from anyone in North Carolina who owns controls or operates a grain mill, grain elevator or a warehouse connected to the storage of grains. It will also include anyone who owns and operates a truck or tractor-trailer unit or similar that buys, sells or solicits for sale or resale. The bill will also cover those who contract for these services or are involved in the exchange or sales of grain. These changes to the requirements for a surety bond are part of a bill that will make changes to all of the grain dealer licensing laws in North Carolina. Additional changes will include the ability of the Commissioner to refuse to grant a license to anyone who:
  • Has acted or portrayed themselves as a grain dealer in the past without the proper licensing.
  • Has hired someone convicted of involvement in fraud, theft or misrepresentation regarding buying or selling of grain.

Finding Your Grain Dealer Bond

Finding an insurance company that handles this large an agricultural dealer bond would be difficult, but BuySurety can supply these and other agricultural dealer bonds easily. They can apply online and even probably be notified the same day that they are approved for the grain dealer bond they need. When your business needs a surety bond because of changes in the requirements, new business ventures or any other situation, be sure to contact BuySurety. We have been supplying surety bonds, including grain dealer bonds for agriculture for over two decades across the nation. Find out just how easy it is to get bonded with BuySurety today.

Tags: , ,


Comments Off on North Carolina Grain Dealer Bond Updated

Agriculture Dealer Bonds Protect Food Industry

Written by JoAnn Smith on April 8th, 2014. Posted in Agricultural Bonds, Bond Types, California, Latest News, License and Permit Bonds, Surety Bond Blog

     agriculture dealer bonds and usda      
agriculture dealer bonds protect USDA clients
Recent decisions by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) serve to illustrate just how important the use of agriculture dealer bonds can be when it comes to ensuring that everyone plays fair in the industry. A recent citation by the USDA was only one of several that came into play. A Salinas-based produce seller was found to be playing fast and loose with the goods it contracted to buy. The only problem was they weren’t always paying for what they received.

Over A Million Dollars in Produce

Drobnick Distributing, Inc. may have contracted to purchase 55 lots of produce for just a little over $1.4 million. The problems began when they never did get around to producing the payment. The farm that the produce was bought from, William Consalo & Sons brought suit against the company when they failed to make the promised payments. Because of the actions of the USDA and the violations of the Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act committed by Drobnick Distributing, the company will not be able to do business in the produce industry. It is banned until March 12, 2016. If they should at that time decide to reenter the business, an agriculture dealer bond will be required to be posted by the company.

agriculture Dealer Bonds Violations

While this is by no means the only company to be banded, the large amount of the unpaid contract makes it an outstanding one for the USDA this year. However, every year companies that contract for perishable produce and fail to pay when they are delivered are banned. Most contracts are in the tens of thousands of dollars, unlike the action against Drobnick Distributing. None the less, because the growers have little recourse to recoup losses when the companies do not keep up their end of the contract, agriculture dealer bonds are often required of any company that has a history of leaving the growers unpaid.

Get Yourself Bonded Fast

Want to ensure that your side of the bargain is not the only one kept? Requiring an agriculture dealer bond as a condition of signing can help with this in the perishable agricultural industry. Any contract that is signed should be a guarantee of delivery of payment. However, getting the contract bonded as well will help to keep both parties protected. Why take chances with your next contract? Get yourself bonded and require it in your contracts. Use BuySurety to ensure that the surety bond you require is as solid as your own word. BuySurety has been providing agriculture dealer bonds and every other kind of surety bond you can name for over two decades across the country. Get bonded with BuySurety and be sure.

Tags: , , ,


Comments Off on Agriculture Dealer Bonds Protect Food Industry

Commercial Surety Bond Legislature in 2012 in Florida

Written by JoAnn Smith on April 11th, 2013. Posted in Agricultural Bonds, Florida, Motor Vehicle Bonds, Performance Bonds, Surety Bond Blog

Florida surety bonds
State Seal for the State of Florida
April 11, 2013 – There were eight (8) House Bills that went into effect during the past legislative session that impacted the posting of bonds. They affected the licensing of surplus line agents for title insurance agencies, the Hillsborough County Aviation Authority public officials and the regulations regarding the testing of new automobile technologies on public roads. There was also legislative action on bills that will affect corrective actions by solid waste facilities, posting vehicle titles with DMV, citrus fruit dealer licenses, North Lake County Hospital District Board of Trustees bonding and permit bonds for planting non-native species.

House Bill No. 725: License Bond—Surplus Lines Agent

A prior law requiring the posting of a surety bond for surplus line agents was repealed and instead requires title insurance agencies to post a surety bond for a minimum of $35,000. The bond is to cover damages by the violation of a title insurance agency contract to any appointing title insurer. This is in addition to the currently required deposit of securities or surety bond for a title insurance agency license. This law was enacted May 04, 2012 and became effective October 1, 2012. Follow our links for more information and to read Florida House Bill 725 directly.

House Bill No. 575: Public Officials

The Florida House Bill 575 established the Hillsborough County Aviation Authority and required it to post surety bonds for its treasurer and any other officers or employees. These bonds are posted to ensure the proper performance of its officers and employees, with the amount to be determined by The Hillsborough County Aviation Authority. This law was enacted on April 13, 2012 and was effective upon enactment. For full details of Florida House Bill 575 please click on the link to the legislative website.

House Bill No. 1207: Miscellaneous Bond—Autonomous Vehicle Testing

Florida’s House Bill 1207 is concerned with the regulations for testing new technology vehicles that operate autonomously without a human in control on public roads. Any entity that intends to test this type of vehicle on public roads will be required to submit either a posted surety bond or proof of insurance for $5million. This bill was enacted on April 27, 2012 and became effective July 1, 2012. For more details on Florida House Bill 1207 please follow our link.

House Bill No. 503: Financial Assurance

Florida House Bill 503 allows a posting of a performance surety bond to be acceptable financial assurance when corrective actions are being required for a solid waste facility. This bill was enacted on May 04, 2012 and became effective on July 1, 2012. For more details on Florida’s House Bill 503 be sure to follow our link to the legislative site.

House Bill No. 1223: Miscellaneous Bond—Certificate of Title

Florida House Bill 1223 applies to a request for certificate of title for a motor vehicle when unable to provide a prior certificate of title. This will require a lost title surety bond to be posted for twice the value of the motor vehicle. The bond covers situations where the certificate of title’s search was not conducted properly to secure against loss for the person with a security interest. Although direct action on the bond is permitted, the aggregate liability of the surety bond is limited to the bond amount. This bill was enacted on April 27, 2012 and became effective July 1, 2012. For more information and details on House Bill 1223 be sure to follow our link to the legislative site.

House Bill No. 1237: License Bond—Citrus Fruit Dealers

Florida House bill 1237 makes changes to the requirements of citrus fruit dealers. An addition to the current requirement of a license bond to be posted allows a citrus fruit dealer to provide a letter of credit in lieu of the bond. Previously bond amounts were based on the production levels of the dealer, but under new laws the amount of the bond or letter of credit will be determined through regulations. This bill was enacted on April 27, 2012 and became effective July 1, 2012. For details and additional information on Florida House Bill 1237 please follow the legislative website link.

House Bill No. 1299: Public Officials

As of April 27, 2012 all Board of Trustee members for the North Lake County Hospital District will be required to be bonded through a public official surety bond. These bonds are required as a security to ensure the proper performance of the duties of the board. For more details on this new requirement due to House Bill 1299 be sure to follow our link to the legislative site.

House Bill No. 7117: Permit Bond

Florida’s House Bill 7117 made changes to the requirements for posting permit bonds to allow the planting of non-native species in an area that exceeds two acres. In the new law alternative forms of security will be accepted beyond the current surety bond or certificate of deposit. The amount of the bond was also revised. Instead of the prior amount of no less than 150% of the approximate cost of removing and destroying plants, the amount now cannot exceed 150% of these costs. This new law was enacted on April 14, 2012 and became effective July 1, 2012. For a closer look at the details of Florida House Bill 7117 please follow the link provided.

Tags: , , , , ,


Comments Off on Commercial Surety Bond Legislature in 2012 in Florida

Surety Bond Legislature Update for South Dakota

Written by JoAnn Smith on February 12th, 2013. Posted in Agricultural Bonds, Legislation, South Dakota, Surety Bond Blog, Warehousing Bonds

     South Dakota's Famous Mount Rushmore
South Dakota’s Famous Mount Rushmore
The State of South Dakota passed three bills having to do with surety bonds in 2012, two in the House and one in the Senate. The lone Senate bill allowed a change in the posting of performance sureties for the South Dakota Housing Development Authority.   In the House, one of the bills was the repeal of all business having to do with the 2010 Centennial Logo including a bond posting. The remaining bill was a change to the procedures for anyone who wishes to claim against an agricultural dealer surety bond for grain warehouseman. All bills passed into law within the customary 90 days after enactment.  

Senate Bill No. 56 — Public Officials Performance Surety Bonds

With the passing of South Dakota Senate Bill 56 changes have been made in regards to the posting of public official performance surety bonds by the South Dakota Housing Development Authority (The Authority). Until the passing of SB 56 each commissioner of The Authority was required to post a $50,000 public official bond, with the Executive Director of The Authority requiring a $100,000 surety bond.   It also allowed a blanket bond to be posted that would cover all the commissioners, the executive director and all the employees of The Authority that required a public official surety bond. Under the new law, The Authority will be allowed the alternative of purchasing an insurance policy to cover everyone formerly covered by the blanket bond including the commissioners, the executive director and all applicable employees.   The insurance policy will, like the public official surety bond, be posted or purchased on the condition of the faithful performance of the duties of The Authority executives, commissioners and employees. This South Dakota Senate Bill 56 was enacted on March 01, 2012 and went into effect on June 01, 2012. For a look at the complete text of SB 56 please feel free to use the link provided in this summary.    

House Bill No. 1016 — Business Use Surety Bond

With the passing of South Dakota House Bill 1016 the application process for the use of the State of South Dakota’s State Centennial Logo was repealed. Part of the process for the business use of this logo was the posting of a surety bond, which has been eliminated along with the procedure for the use of the State Centennial Logo. The House Bill 1016 was enacted on February 08, 2012 and went into effect immediately. For anyone wishing to read South Dakota House Bill 1016 in its entirety please follow the link provided in this report.    

House Bill No. 1036 — Grain Warehousemen Surety Bond Claims Procedures

With the passing of South Dakota House Bill 1036, changes have been made regarding the procedures for anyone who holds an electronic warehouse receipt and wishes to file a claim on a grain warehouseman’s agriculture dealer bond. Under current laws, the claimant would be required to notify the Public Utilities Commission (The Commission) of their claim and could only proceed on the claim if The Commission was not intending to institute a claim on the posted bond.   With the passage of HB1036 the claimant can proceed if The Commission has not responded in writing within 60 days of the notification by the individual with a claim. At the passage of the 60 day period the claimant can proceed with their claim on the warehouseman’s surety bond. House Bill 1036 was enacted on February 24, 2012 and went into effect on May 24, 2012. For a look at the complete text of South Dakota’s House Bill 1036 be sure to follow the link provided in this bill summary.  

Tags: , , ,


Comments Off on Surety Bond Legislature Update for South Dakota