A chargeback is a legal argument with a delivery note attached, and most plants lose it before the damage is even found. Not because the supplier is right, but because the evidence was gathered after the trailer left — at which point the only honest answer to "when did this happen?" is that nobody knows, and the party who cannot answer that question is the party who pays. The awkward part is that this is entirely a process problem rather than a technology one. The photograph that settles a dispute takes four seconds and has to be taken at a specific moment; taken twenty minutes later on the dock it proves nothing, because the damage could have occurred during unload. Everything below is built around that single timing constraint, plus the discipline that stops chargebacks becoming a revenue exercise that suppliers learn to price into the part. See it on your own data against your own receipt process.
EVIDENCE GUIDE · DAMAGE AND CHARGEBACKS
Packaging Damage and Supplier Chargebacks
Damage classified before it is charged, evidence captured at the only moment it proves anything, a workflow with owners and deadlines, and a defence that holds when the supplier pushes back.
At load, originCondition baseline
On the trailer, at arrivalThe frame that settles it
After unloadProves nothing on its own
Classify Before You Charge
Five categories, each with a different liable party and a different burden of proof. A chargeback raised without a category is a chargeback the supplier can answer with a question.
DMG-T
Transit damage
Occurred between despatch and arrival. Crushing, shifting, water ingress, securing failure.
LiableCarrier, or supplier where loading and securing were theirs
Proof neededCondition at load versus condition on the trailer at arrival
DMG-H
Handling damage
Fork strikes, drops, stacking failures. Occurs at whichever site was handling at the time.
LiableWhoever held custody at the point it happened
Proof neededA custody chain with timestamps either side of the event
DMG-P
Packaging specification failure
The pack was built to spec and the spec was inadequate — wrong orientation rule, insufficient dunnage, stacking tolerance too generous.
LiableUsually nobody. This is an engineering change, not a chargeback
Proof neededRecurrence across suppliers and lanes for the same part
DMG-N
Non-conforming pack
Built contrary to the agreed specification — wrong container, missing dunnage, over-stacked, mixed handling unit where none is permitted.
LiableSupplier, and the cleanest category to charge
Proof neededThe specification, plus an image showing the deviation
DMG-C
Concealed damage
Not visible until the pack is opened or the part is fitted. The hardest category and the one most disputes arise from.
LiableContested by default — depends entirely on what was captured earlier
Proof needed">Seal integrity, arrival imagery, and a documented time to discovery
The category that keeps the programme honest
DMG-P. When the same damage appears across different suppliers, carriers and lanes for the same part, the packaging specification is wrong and charging suppliers for it is both unwinnable and corrosive. Route it to packaging engineering with the recurrence data attached. Programmes that skip this category get a reputation among suppliers within two quarters, and after that every legitimate chargeback is contested on principle.
The Evidence Standard
Six elements. A file missing any one of them is defensible only if the supplier chooses not to examine it — which they will, once the amounts are material.
01Identity of the unitThe licence plate from the transport label, tying the damaged unit to a specific shipment, and the container asset identifier where one exists.
02Timestamped imagery on the trailerCaptured before removal. Once a unit is on the dock, the damage could have happened at unload and you cannot prove otherwise.
03Seal and vehicle recordSeal number matched at arrival, carrier and vehicle identity, gate-in timestamp. Establishes that the load was not opened in transit.
04The specification it breachedThe packaging standard as agreed, with the specific clause. "Damaged" is an assertion; "stacked four high against a three-high limit" is a finding.
05Quantified impactUnits affected, scrapped, reworked and the labour hours consumed. A chargeback for an estimate invites a negotiation about the estimate.
06Chain of custodyWho held the unit, when, and what state it was in at each handover. The element that converts an opinion into an attribution.
Next step
Most chargeback programmes fail on element two, and only on element two.
Everything else can be reconstructed afterwards. Arrival imagery cannot.
Capture Points and What Each Proves
Four moments. Only one of them is decisive, and it is the one that costs the least and is skipped the most.
← Swipe to see all columns →
| Capture point | Cost | What it proves | What it cannot prove |
|---|---|---|---|
| At load, origin | Supplier seconds | Condition when custody transferred | Nothing about what happened afterwards |
| Gate arrival | Near zero | Seal intact, vehicle identity, arrival time | Condition of the goods inside |
| On the trailer, before removal | Four seconds | Damage existed before your operation touched it | Where in transit it occurred |
| After unload, on the dock | Free, and usually the only one taken | That damage exists | That your own unload did not cause it |
The fourth row is the honest description of most current practice, and it explains the outcome: a chargeback supported only by dock imagery is answerable with a single sentence — "that could have happened at your dock" — and it is a sentence the supplier will use, because it is true.
The Chargeback Workflow
Six stages with an owner and a deadline on each. Stages without deadlines silt up, and a chargeback raised four months after the event is a chargeback that will be settled at a discount.
Stage 1
Detect and captureDamage identified at receipt, imagery taken on the trailer, category assigned, unit identity recorded.
OwnerReceiving leadDeadlineBefore removal
Stage 2
Segregate and quantifyAffected units contained, stock status changed so nothing is allocated, impact counted rather than estimated.
OwnerReceiving leadDeadlineSame shift
Stage 3
Notify the supplierEarly notification with the evidence file attached. Notification and claim are separate acts, and the first should be immediate.
OwnerSupplier qualityDeadline24 hours
Stage 4
Disposition and cost buildAccept, rework, return or scrap decided, and the cost assembled from parts, freight, labour hours and any premium recovery.
OwnerNamed approverDeadlineFive days
Stage 5
Raise the chargebackIssued with category, evidence, specification clause and itemised cost. Never issued as a lump sum with a reference number.
OwnerPurchasingDeadlineStated window
Stage 6
Corrective action and closeRoot cause from the supplier, action agreed, recurrence tracked. Closing the money without closing the cause guarantees a repeat.
OwnerSupplier qualityDeadlinePer ladder rung
Dispute Defence
Five arguments, in the order suppliers make them. Each has a good answer and each answer depends on something you either captured or did not.
"That could have happened at your dock."
AnswerTimestamped imagery taken on the trailer before removal, with the gate-in time and intact seal record alongside it.
Fails ifYour only images were taken on the dock.
"We shipped it in specification."
AnswerThe specification clause and an image showing the deviation — stack height, orientation, dunnage, container type.
Fails ifThe packaging standard was never formally agreed or is out of date.
"That is the carrier's problem, not ours."
AnswerThe custody terms. Where loading and securing were the supplier's, so is securing failure — and where the carrier is theirs, the counterparty is still them.
Fails ifIncoterms and custody points were never written down for this lane.
"The amount is not justified."
AnswerItemised cost — units scrapped, rework hours, freight, and any premium recovery — rather than a rate card figure.
Fails ifYou charged a standard administrative fee with no cost behind it.
"You raised this months later."
AnswerA notification date inside the contracted window, separate from the claim date. Notify immediately, claim when the cost is built.
Fails ifNotification and claim were the same event, and both were late.
Test your evidence file against a real dispute
Capture timing design
Category taxonomy
Evidence file structure
Recurrence tracking
What Not to Charge Back
Restraint is what makes the programme work. Every unjustified chargeback trains the supply base to contest all of them, and the contested ones cost more to administer than they recover.
Damage your own operation causedObvious, and it happens constantly where dock imagery is the only evidence. If you cannot exclude your own unload, do not charge.
Specification inadequacyWhere the pack met the standard and the standard was wrong. Route to packaging engineering with the recurrence pattern.
Administrative fees with no costA flat fee unbacked by an itemised cost is the fastest way to make the whole programme look like a margin exercise.
Damage found after the notification windowUnless it is genuinely concealed and the window for concealed damage is separately contracted.
Returnable wear within normal lifeContainers are engineered for a defined number of trips. Wear inside that life is a pool cost, not a supplier failure.
Anything you would not defend in personThe practical test. If the file would not survive being walked through with the supplier's quality manager, it should not be issued.
The goal is fewer chargebacks, not more
A chargeback recovers a fraction of the true cost of damaged material — the disruption, the rework and the schedule impact are rarely fully recoverable. Its real value is as a signal that produces corrective action. Programmes measured on amount recovered drift toward volume; programmes measured on recurrence reduction drift toward prevention, which is where the money actually is.
What to Measure
Six figures. Amount recovered is deliberately not the headline. Our analytics and reporting module carries them.
Damage rate per thousand receiptsBy category and by supplier. The base rate that everything else is judged against, and the number that should be falling.
Evidence completeness rateShare of damage records holding all six evidence elements. Predicts your dispute outcomes better than any other figure.
Trailer-capture rateDamage imaged before removal as a share of all damage found. The single operational habit the whole programme rests on.
Dispute rate and outcomeContested chargebacks and how they resolved. A rising dispute rate means either your evidence or your restraint has slipped.
Recurrence after corrective actionSame supplier, same category, next quarter. The measure of whether the corrective actions are real.
Notification-to-claim intervalDays from detection to notification, and from notification to claim. Late notification is the defence you hand the supplier.
Frequently Asked Questions
When exactly should damage be photographed?
Before the unit leaves the trailer, without exception. This is the only capture point that proves the damage existed before your operation touched the goods — once material is on the dock, the supplier's answer is that unload caused it, and that answer is unanswerable without arrival imagery. It costs a few seconds per event and it is the single element that most chargeback programmes are missing. Capture at load on the supplier side as well where you can, since the pair gives you a genuine before-and-after.
How should damage be classified?
Into categories that map to different liable parties: transit, handling, packaging specification failure, non-conforming pack, and concealed. The categories matter because they carry different burdens of proof and different owners — non-conforming pack is the cleanest to charge because the specification is documentary, while specification failure usually should not be charged at all because the supplier complied with a standard that was inadequate. A record without a category invites the supplier to supply one.
What belongs in the evidence file?
Unit identity from the transport label licence plate, timestamped imagery taken on the trailer, seal and vehicle record with the gate-in time, the specification clause breached, quantified impact in units and labour hours, and the chain of custody. Five of those six can be reconstructed after the fact; the imagery cannot, which is why capture timing dominates the design. Keep the file structure identical across every claim so a supplier reviewing several sees a consistent standard rather than an improvised one.
Should notification and the claim be the same event?
No, and separating them removes one of the five standard defences. Notify the supplier within a short window with the evidence attached — this preserves your position and often gets a faster corrective response — then raise the financial claim once disposition is decided and the cost is properly built. Combining them means the claim waits for the cost build, the notification arrives late, and "you raised this months later" becomes a legitimate objection rather than a deflection.
How do we handle concealed damage?
Contract for it separately, because it cannot meet the trailer-capture standard by definition. Agree a distinct notification window for damage not visible until opening or fitting, require seal integrity evidence and arrival imagery of the outer pack, and document time to discovery. It remains the most contested category and always will be — the practical mitigation is reducing the interval between receipt and first use, since a shorter interval narrows the window in which your own handling could plausibly be responsible.
Should we charge an administrative fee?
Only if it reflects a real cost you can itemise. Flat fees unbacked by cost are the fastest route to making the programme look like a margin exercise, and once suppliers form that view every claim gets contested on principle including the well-evidenced ones. Charge the parts, the rework hours, the freight and any premium recovery, each itemised. The credibility that buys is worth considerably more than the fee.
What should success look like?
Falling damage rates and falling chargeback volume, not rising recovery. A chargeback recovers a fraction of the true cost, so its value is as a signal that drives corrective action rather than as a revenue line. Measure recurrence after corrective action by supplier and category — that is the number that tells you whether anything actually changed. Our integrations overview covers how receipt events and imagery connect to your quality and purchasing systems.
Win It at the Trailer, Not in the Meeting
Damage categorised before it is charged, imagery captured at the one moment that proves anything, notification separated from the claim, and restraint applied so the legitimate claims keep their credibility.
Works with GTL and Odette labelling · Runs on existing handsets · Connects to your QMS
August 17, 2026By Alex Rowan
All Blogs
