A shared carrier address is a relationship clue, not proof that companies are related improperly or that anyone is committing fraud. A match can arise from a shared office or residence, an affiliated operation, or an outdated record. A mailing or process-agent address is also different from a physical business address; establish which field you matched before interpreting it. This guide compares records you already know. HaulFacts lookup does not search by address or phone. Use the match to ask targeted identity and ownership questions, then document the answers and evidence.

First, verify that the fields truly match

Addresses often differ in suite number, postal formatting, city spelling, or mailing versus physical purpose. Compare the original field values, not just a normalized label. Do the same for phone numbers: a shared main line can belong to a legitimate office, and a recycled number can create an apparent connection without a current relationship.

Check the record dates. A shared historical address may be less relevant than current independent details. Conversely, a recent, unexplained change could be worth a closer review. Neither fact alone proves an adverse conclusion.

Use a measured review workflow

  1. Confirm each already-known record’s legal name and USDOT number in HaulFacts lookup. For broader public-data matching, use the FMCSA Company Census File with a documented method and date.
  2. Preserve the matching fields, source URLs, and dates.
  3. Determine whether the value is a physical location, mailing address, phone, or contact email.
  4. Call independently published contacts and ask each company to explain any operational relationship relevant to the booking.
  5. Check the actual party tendering, dispatching, and arriving at pickup under your identity-control process.

For example, two carriers may list the same small-office address. One might be an owner-operator and the other a related dispatch business. That can be ordinary and still require clear disclosure about who will transport the shipment. The appropriate conclusion is “shared address observed; relationship confirmed/awaiting confirmation,” not a public fraud label.

Focus on the shipment decision

What matters most is whether the counterparty and motor carrier are who they claim to be, have the relevant authority, and satisfy your documented load requirements. A shared address does not answer those questions. It should lead to carrier contact-change review where details changed and to an independent identity verification before pickup.

Public records support transparent, narrow statements. Avoid building a blacklist solely from shared fields. False associations can harm legitimate carriers and make a review process less reliable.

If the address match affects an immediate load, route the exception to the person responsible for release. A clear choice to seek confirmation is more defensible than an informal rule that treats common contact data as a pass or fail result.

Use carrier contact changes for the date comparison and verify carrier identity for independent confirmation of the booking party.

Sources