Check the output of prospectus for a list of all shipments. Then check those shipments on the carrier website.
It’s not possible to tell if some have a weather delay from the information given. Inputs, Functions, Outputs.
In some cases, the only way to check if a shipment is eligible is to attempt a dispute on that shipment.
Insufficient information exists at this point in the process to do the full analysis. There are some known false positives that simply cannot be marginalized, for the result would only lower the savings number, due to an unknown unknown. And generally not best practice.
Surely you’ve come across this before in your practice as you done here? Anyone who attempts filing on the dispute may encounter this quandary. The intent of this article is to detail the cause as a part of the standard operating procedure.
The process
The process is more complex than a binary procedure. Like a rocket, a great audit is multiphase. The first phase is the only one included within Prospectus. Phase 1.
Here, in this case, the shipment is indeed late, and the fact that there are no attributes regarding a weather delay in the information available at that time, it’s best practice to report that shipment as eligible for refund and proceed with filing.
Such conditions are tracked, wrangled and incorporated into a best practice. A workflow. Efficient. Precise. Defined by standard operating procedures.
Next step. The best practice next step is to proceed with attempting the dispute and the ingest the response message observed. Likely the very same information that invoked this very quandary. Additional procedures are built into the workflow that incorporate this response in a defined and tuned process. Subsequent phases of the audit.
Value. The value from a time savings alone, finding the shipments where a dispute should be filed, and doing everything up until this point is the hardest part. Next is filing the dispute. Time savings exists there too.
Some parts of the workflow are only worked out by attempting a dispute. The dispute filing service takes care of that and not incorporated into the Prospectus like it is in the audit and recovery service (AAR).
– Blake B. – Sales
Descriptive statistics. A regression could be ran, but that would be done on an alternate sample set, and there’s quite a bit of difference between businesses, with regards to success rates. Regardless, it’s better to file than not in such cases. A small part of larger sample.
Input credentials approach
Prospectus details potential refunds over a trailing one month sample from today’s date. The effective start date and end date of the period analyzed is listed prominently on within the reports generated.
Upload carrier invoice approach
Prospectus details potential refunds for the sample period provide. If one invoice, then the invoice from that date range. Note: older invoices do not work, due to external limitations. In such cases, the refunds reported are less than actual.
Note on refund potential
Per the terms of service provided by the carriers on most refund types, only two weeks of refunds are able to be captured (i.e. the most recently two weeks). As such, the information reported within the results is subject to these limitations and can suggest a larger savings number. The refund amount shown here is the projected savings over the date range reported.