FMCSA Is Making Its Own Data Harder to Find. Here Is What Has Changed.

FMCSA's data systems are the primary tools consumers, researchers, journalists, and advocates use to evaluate moving companies, track enforcement, and hold bad actors accountable. Over the past year, a series of changes have made this data progressively harder to access, search, and cross-reference. No single change was announced as a restriction. Each was framed as an update, modernization, or transition. But the cumulative effect is that the public's ability to monitor FMCSA's regulation of the household goods industry has diminished.

In October 2026, FMCSA renamed the National Consumer Complaint Database to the 'FMCSA Complaint Center.' The new description calls it 'a resource for the general public, CMV drivers, and transportation industry professionals to report concerns within the commercial motor vehicle industry.'

The word 'consumer' was removed. The phrase 'household goods' does not appear. The original NCCDB was created by Congressional directive specifically to track consumer complaints about moving companies. The rebrand repositions it as a general trucking industry tool.

OOIDA Executive Vice President Lewie Pugh told a Senate subcommittee in early 2025 that the NCCDB 'seems to be where complaints go to die.' The GAO called it out in 2023 for not meeting the needs of motor carriers. FMCSA's response: rebrand the system, not fix the enforcement outcomes.

In October 2026, the NCCDB's public complaint search function at complaint.fmcsa.dot.gov/search-complaints allowed anyone to search aggregate complaint data across all companies by complaint type, date range, and category. A retired transportation attorney used this tool to compile the complaint data published in Trunk's five-year enforcement analysis.

By November 2026, the same URL redirects to a private Tableau server requiring authentication credentials. The ability to search across all companies to compile aggregate data (e.g., total HHG complaints by year, total hostage load complaints by company) appears to have been placed behind a login wall.

Individual company complaint pages (complaint.fmcsa.dot.gov/company/{id}/{slug}) still display monthly summaries. But the cross-company aggregate search that produced the data showing 7,385 HHG complaints through October 2026 may no longer be publicly replicable.

The practical effect: the enforcement analysis compiled from this data may now be the only public source for those aggregate figures. Anyone attempting to verify or update the analysis faces an access barrier that did not exist weeks earlier.

FMCSA operates multiple carrier lookup systems. They do not agree with each other.

For Howards Vanlines (DOT 4391903), documented in October 2026: FMCSA's PYM 'search movers' still showed the company as operating. Motus showed 'active' on initial search but 'inactive' under 'operating authority registrations.' FMCSA Snapshot showed 'not authorized.' Three tools, three statuses, same company.

For Handle With Care Moving (DOT 3190967), confirmed by a journalist in November 2026: FMCSA Snapshot shows 'Not Authorized.' Other systems may show different statuses.

For Value Added Moving (DOT 3488475): Motus does not return results for the DBA name 'Value Added Moving.' PYM does not return results for the corporate name 'Moving Storage and Logistics Services Inc.' Motus showed authority as suspended while PYM showed it as active.

For I-95 Moving LLC (Menards' new entity): Does not appear in PYM at all.

A consumer checking one system would conclude a company is authorized. A consumer checking another would conclude it is not. A broker that dispatches to a carrier shown as 'active' in one system can claim it performed due diligence, even if another system shows 'not authorized.'

FMCSA's A&I database publishes the company name, case number, violation codes, and settlement amount for each closed enforcement case. It does not publish the actual enforcement decisions issued by regional directors.

The reasoning behind a $971 settlement (Vanguard Moving Services, one violation) versus a $50,418 settlement (US Relocation Inc, four violations) is not available. What FMCSA's investigators found, what evidence they reviewed, what consumer complaints they examined, and how the settlement amounts were calculated are not public.

Regional director enforcement decisions are federal agency records subject to the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). But without a FOIA request for each specific case, the decisions remain inaccessible.

When a carrier or broker applies for FMCSA authority, a summary is posted in the FMCSA Register. Any person who opposes the application has 10 days to file a protest. But the actual OP-1 applications, though public information, are not available on FMCSA's website.

A retired transportation attorney raised this directly with FMCSA's new entrant and carrier vetting administrators in October 2026, asking how OP-1 applications can be obtained within the 10-day protest window. Without access to the applications, the protest mechanism is theoretical. A broker with a complaint history can add carrier authority, as Value Added Moving did in September 2025, without anyone outside FMCSA having the opportunity to review or challenge the application.

FMCSA's consumer-facing website (fmcsa.dot.gov/protect-your-move/what-if-problems) tells consumers: 'FMCSA does not have the authority to resolve claims against a moving company.'

This is a misrepresentation by omission. The Secretary of Transportation does have authority to adjudicate claims under 49 U.S.C. 14704(c)(1), through the DOT Office of Hearings. FMCSA's own attorneys have processed two complaints through this procedure (Vetne v. Eagle Moving, FMCSA-2026-0069, settled March 2026; Griffin v. Menards, FMCSA-2026-2971, pending).

More than one year after FMCSA's Chief Counsel office first acknowledged this remedy, the consumer guidance page still does not mention it. The only administrative remedy available to consumers for broker and carrier regulatory violations remains hidden from the consumers it was designed to protect.

FMCSA conducted zero new entrant safety audits for HHG carriers in FY 2022, 2023, 2024, 2025, and 2026. During the same period, 36,838 to 62,164 new entrant audits were conducted annually for other carrier categories.

The new entrant program data is available through FMCSA's A&I system. But the absence of HHG audits is not flagged, disclosed, or explained anywhere in FMCSA's public materials. A consumer researching the new entrant program would find general descriptions of safety monitoring for new carriers, with no indication that HHG carriers are exempt in practice.

Value Added Moving (DOT 3488475) added carrier authority in September 2025. Motus shows 'NEVER IN NEW ENTRANT PROGRAM.' The company accumulated 181 complaints through September 2026. No explanation for the exemption is publicly available.

Each of these changes has a plausible administrative explanation. The NCCDB was renamed as part of a system update. The complaint search was migrated to a new analytics platform. The search tool discrepancies reflect an incomplete Motus transition. Enforcement decisions have never been published. OP-1 applications have always been hard to find. The consumer website has not been updated.

But the cumulative effect is directional. Public access to FMCSA's data about the household goods moving industry has diminished across every dimension: complaint aggregation, carrier verification, enforcement transparency, application oversight, consumer remedies, and new entrant accountability.

The changes coincide with a period in which FMCSA closed zero HHG carrier enforcement cases (FY 2026), conducted zero HHG new entrant audits (five consecutive years), and saw HHG consumer complaints surge to their highest level since 2021. The less visible FMCSA's data is, the less accountable its enforcement (or lack of enforcement) becomes.

This may not be intentional. But it does not need to be intentional to be harmful.