PI-004 ยท Shipping and freight
Accessorial charges, contract rates and vendor billing
Cargo signed for at a berth no vessel had used.
Presenting problem
We analyze shipping charges, accessorial fees, repeated invoices, contract rates, vendor deductions, and pricing inconsistencies across high-volume transaction populations.
What brought us in
Freight cost per unit rose steadily while volumes, routes and fuel indices were stable.
What the client believed
That accessorial charges were an unavoidable consequence of tight capacity.
What the evidence showed
A material share of accessorial charges had no supporting operational event, and a second share was billed at a rate the governing contract schedule did not contain.
How the examination proceeded
Method applied to this engagement.
- 01Preserved contracts, rate schedules, amendments, invoices, tender records and gate or scan events.
- 02Extracted the governing rate for each shipment at the date of service, including amendments in force.
- 03Compared each invoiced line to the rate in force and to the operational event that would justify it.
- 04Excluded any line where an amendment, exception or negotiated allowance explained the difference.
- 05Quantified the unsupported and misrated populations separately.
Substantiated findings
What the records support.
Accessorial charges were invoiced and paid with no corresponding operational event in the shipment record.
Substantiated - documentaryInvoiced rates exceeded the rate in force under the governing schedule at the date of service.
Substantiated - contractualAmendment effective dates were applied inconsistently between the vendor and the client.
Substantiated - reconciliationExposure
$8m+ shipping charges, $3m+ affected vendor billing
Figures are rounded and generalized for publication. In delivery, each figure is deterministic and carries its inputs, calculation version and population definition.
Control failure map
Why it was possible.
- Invoice approval verified arithmetic, not entitlement.
- Rate schedules lived outside the payment system.
- No one compared amendment effective dates between parties.
Outcome
What the client did with it.
- Recovery pursued under audit rights already present in the contract.
- Rate in force made a required input to invoice approval.
- Accessorial codes tied to an operational event before payment.
Each disputed line traces to the invoice image, the governing schedule page, and the operational record or its documented absence.
