What’s inside: output checking · savings measurement
The question this file answersDo we pay the extras on a carrier invoice because nobody can see whether the event actually happened?
Fits: shippers and forwarders auditing hundreds to thousands of carrier invoices a month.
Typical, from the logistics playbook. The freight-audit desk handles carrier invoices by the hundred or thousand a month, and the extras — liftgate, waiting time, extra stop, redelivery — are lines the booking never showed. Each becomes an e-mail thread. It hurts when a new carrier arrives with an unread tariff.
When the weekly invoice batch lands, the auditor’s list is the extras with no event behind them or a rate off the tariff — each with the tariff line and the POD note already attached — instead of every liftgate line in the batch. Finance can see which carriers bill extras that do not match, and how often.
Typical, not a measured client result. Every figure here comes from the playbook source named below.
less manual audit effort on the carrier-invoice desk — freight-audit studies (2023); extras are inside that desk, not measured alone
Before: every liftgate and waiting-time line becomes a thread. After: freight-audit studies (2023) report 50–70% less manual effort on the carrier-invoice desk — payment still waits when the event log disagrees.
Ardent Partners (2023) puts best-in-class freight audit at 75%+ touchless; Transporeon/project44 cases: 50–65% less manual audit effort; the logistics playbook uses 50–70%. Accessorial lines are part of that desk — no study isolates them, and none of this is our measurement.
Your TMS and your AP ledger stay as they are — Dynamics, SAP, CargoWise, whichever you run. Built on our carrier-invoice audit file, applied to the surcharge lines:
New accessorial types. The driver’s story. Customer refusals. Gaps in the contract.
If accessorial rates are only in contract PDFs, the first task is turning them into a rate table — that is audit work before it is a saving. An event that nobody recorded — the driver did wait, but no one wrote it down — looks like an overcharge and needs a person; the list will show you gaps in your own event capture. The Ardent and Transporeon/project44 figures describe the freight-audit desk as a whole; surcharges are inside them, not measured alone.
The path: free 60-second estimate → free 20-minute review → paid audit of this one process (€1.5–3K, typically two weeks) → pilot with your people in the loop (€10–20K, weeks, not quarters). No transformation programme. Prices are public, on the services page →
Scoped in the audit — the playbook has no estimate for this exact desk.
That depends on your volumes and wage costs — this page will not invent the number. The free 60-second estimate runs that calculation from your answers, with every multiplier sourced.
Not a named Aperanda client. Process file · Logistics.
Short process file. Same build as its parent file; the playbook has no separate volume or benchmark for this desk.