Cutting corners can cost you big time when receiving freight. A common misconception persists in the industry regarding receiving documents. Many believe that adding “Subject to Inspection” on documents protects them, but this couldn’t be further from the truth. This blog will explore this common misconception and why it’s a waste of time.
“Subject to Inspection” is a phrase that is often added to receiving documents when accepting freight. The intended purpose of this phrase is to indicate that the goods being received have yet to be inspected and that the receiver retains the right to inspect the shipment before accepting it. In some cases, the receiver notes the visible damage, but it can be challenging to determine the extent of the damage. This is especially true for larger shipments requiring additional inspection time to identify any underlying issues. Hence, “subject to inspection”.
Is Subject to Inspection a Valid Notation?
The phrase sends a message, just not a good one. The news is, “We are too busy to inspect this shipment now, but we will do it when we get around to it.” This can raise questions about the company’s efficiency and attention to detail, which could ultimately harm its reputation. In fact, it can even be a red flag.
If damage or discrepancies are found later on, proving they were present at delivery may be challenging, leading to headaches and potential financial losses.
It remains the consignee’s sole responsibility to note the count and condition of the goods as they are being received. Notations like “subject to inspection” have been determined by the common law courts to be vague and meaningless. Therefore, freight receivers must adhere to a process that includes a detailed inspection of every shipment before accepting it. This way, any damages or discrepancies can be immediately addressed and resolved before they become more problematic.
The phrase “subject to inspection” is not the only problematic wording. Any synonym for “inspection,” such as “review” or “quality control,” will cause confusion. The term “subject to” is considered an improper exception and must not be used on delivery receipts. The phrase “subject to” will be regarded as proof of clear delivery.
Deliveries cannot be made “subject to inspection” by the consignee, and they may not open or examine packages unless there is visible evidence of damage, loss, or shortage. If there is visible or observable evidence of loss, damage, or shortage, the proper exception must be placed on the delivery receipt at the time of delivery.
At first glance, it may seem like the perfect solution for saving time and protecting your interests, but hold that thought! Before you put pen to paper, here are three reasons to avoid using this phrase.
Notating “subject to” can result in an automatic denial of a claim as this notation to most carriers signifies there was NO VISIBLE DAMAGE at delivery. And one must not open the packages if there’s no visible damage or shortage at delivery.
Picture this: Your freight arrives at your dock, and the driver is itching to get unloaded and on to the next stop, so you quickly check the paperwork, and voila! “Subject to Inspection.” It sounds like you’re protected, right? Sadly, this phrase might be putting you in a bad spot. It implies that you didn’t inspect the freight adequately, making it hard to prove that your damages didn’t happen on your watch.
Have you ever played “Telephone,” where a message gets garbled as it passes from one person to another? Well, subject-to-inspection freight is a version of that game, where carriers and suppliers may misinterpret it, leading to disputes about the extent of your liability. That’s why it’s better to avoid using it, as it can make you look negligent and compromise your freight claims.
In life, relationships are crucial, and freight receiving is no different. Processing claims takes an enormous amount of time, so subjecting your partners to unsupported claims with “subject to inspection” can strain those relationships. By avoiding the phrase, you’re protecting your business interests and nurturing essential relationships for the future.
Instead of writing “subject to inspection,” use straightforward language when noting damage or discrepancies. This makes it much easier for carriers to understand the extent of damage and appropriately handle it. Saying something like, “Three boxes were crushed and torn under the weight of the pallet,” is easy to understand and will go a long way in ensuring your freight claim is resolved quickly and efficiently.
When your freight claims management is detailed and understandable, it’s easier for your carriers and suppliers to identify where things went wrong and avoid repeating those mistakes. The result? Fewer damaged shipments, fewer claims, and more time and money saved for everyone involved.
No one likes dealing with damaged shipments, but when it happens, there’s no need to make it worse by using vague language like “Subject to Inspection.” Instead, use clear and concise language to simplify the process and make everyone happier. When your carriers and suppliers see that you’re trying to communicate effectively, they’ll be more willing to work with you in the future, making your life much easier.
In conclusion, freight receiving is anything but a breeze — a complex process requiring careful documentation and communication. Designating freight “subject to inspection” can create more problems than it attempts to solve. Speaking of solving problems, FreightClaims.com offers freight claims software for an extra edge that makes freight claims management a breeze.
So if you’re ready to turn the freight claim game on its head, don’t wait — request a demo from FreightClaims.com today!
