What should happen when a delivery document names the wrong load?
Format: Article.
Hold the file's link to the load, but keep the file. Show why the match is in doubt. Name the person who must check it. Do not change the printed load number just to make the sheet fit the open record.
A proof of delivery is a record meant to support a delivery claim. It may come from the right driver's account yet name the wrong load. The account helps with the check, but it does not settle the match. Check the file's link to the load before it goes to billing.
This guide proposes a correction process for a carrier's document desk. It does not describe installed correction controls in Core Agentic's TMS or a customer's results.
Freeze the disputed link
Give the file its own ID when it arrives. Keep the file unchanged. Save the sender, time, upload details, and message that came with it. Note which load first held the file. Mark that link as disputed. The next person must be able to see that it still needs a check.
Keep the load's other proof in view. One wrong file does not prove that delivery failed. It does not prove the driver made an error or that all the files are wrong. State the exact issue: “This sheet names a different load. The file's link to this load is not confirmed.”
If the file has already reached another team, tell that team which attachment is disputed. Do not silently replace it and assume everyone will notice.
Use a document to load exception table
Use these proposed rules as a review worksheet. Your operations lead should approve the matching evidence for each customer.
| What the reviewer sees | Source check | Decision while unresolved |
|---|---|---|
| Printed reference differs from the upload record | Compare the full customer reference and internal load ID | Hold the association |
| Same reference appears under two customers | Check customer account and shipment dates | Keep both candidates separate |
| Load reference matches but delivery location differs | Compare the approved stop record with the document | Ask dispatch to explain the difference |
| Document covers several deliveries | Check page boundaries and stop references | Do not attach the whole file as proof for each load |
| Sender says the reference was a typo | Request supporting confirmation through an approved contact | Retain the conflict until reviewed |
A close spelling match is a reason to look, not a reason to accept. Check facts that can tell the loads apart. These may include the customer, load number, delivery site, date, and goods. Several matches do not cancel out a clear conflict. Ask where each fact came from before relying on it.
Work through a hypothetical conflict
Suppose a driver uploads a signed delivery sheet while viewing load L482. The sheet names L428. Both loads went to the same distribution center on different days. This is a hypothetical example, not a real carrier record.
The document reviewer saves the upload under file D19 and marks its link to L482 disputed. The reviewer checks the signed date against both stop records. It aligns with L428, but the handwriting alone is not enough to settle the issue.
Dispatch checks the approved trip record and asks the driver which load the sheet came from. The reply names L428 and points to the trip date. The reviewer logs that proof and clears the link to L428. L482 still needs its own sheet. Fixing one link must not clear the other load's missing-file task.
If the reply is unclear, D19 stays held. A tidy queue is not a reason to guess.
Make the correction reversible
Use a correction record with these fields:
- File reference and original load association.
- Proposed load association and conflicting source values.
- Evidence used, including the source of any clarification.
- Reviewer's name or authorized role, decision, and time.
- Reason for the correction and teams affected.
- Result of checking both load records after the change.
Use the approved process to change the link, not the source file. Keep the old link in history. Then open both load records again. Check that the file appears on the right load. Check that it no longer counts as accepted proof on the wrong one. Record both checks, not just a success message.
If the new link proves wrong, mark it disputed and ask for a new review. Do not restore the old link as accepted proof just because it came first. The reviewer must check the right load again. Keep both review notes so the next person can follow what changed and why.
Stop at the document boundary
Accepting a file does not approve every delivery claim or allow staff to send a bill. Billing still has its own checks. Limit file access to the people who need it. A wrong link across customer accounts also needs an access review. Fixing the load number alone may not fix that exposure.
Bring a wrong-load sample with private details removed. Use the table to explain what your team needs to check. Core Agentic can show the TMS sales demo and discuss a custom file review for your team. Book a Demo.
Sources and scope
Core Agentic TMS and design context. The operating steps and fictional examples are first-party recommendations, not verified installed controls or customer results.