Reference

Ten ways a 3PL invoice goes wrong.

This is the taxonomy the engine works from. None of it requires bad faith — a system migration, a mid-year rate change, a rule loaded wrong. The money is real either way.

Every figure below is a worked example, not a customer. The severity mark says whether a finding of that kind can be claimed, reported, or is in your favour.

TIER_ERROR

Tier error

Claimable

A rate that changes past a threshold is billed at one flat rate for the whole quantity, so the cheaper bracket never applies.

Why it happens
A tier is two rules in one line. When a billing system stores a single rate per charge code — most do — the second bracket has nowhere to live and quietly stops existing.

On the invoice
The line item looks ordinary. Nothing on the invoice says a tier was meant to apply; the arithmetic is only wrong if you rebuild it.

Tier error, drawn to scaleA bar for the flat-billed $400.00 and a shorter bar for the $364.00 the two-bracket clause gives, with the $36.00 gap marked between them: 9 percent of the line.Billed flat · 320 × $1.25$400.00As the contract reads · 200 × $1.25 then 120 × $0.95$364.00Overbilled$36.00the second bracket never applied · 9.0% of the line
320 cartons · $1.25 to 200, $0.95 thereafter

Billed flat
  320 × $1.25          = $400.00

As the contract reads
  200 × $1.25          = $250.00
  120 × $0.95          = $114.00
                         -------
                         $364.00

Overbilled                 $36.00
WRONG_RATE

Wrong rate

Claimable

The unit is right and the quantity is right. The number per unit is not the number the contract states.

Why it happens
A mid-year rate change applied to the wrong effective date, or a renewal loaded into the billing system before the amendment that superseded it.

On the invoice
Indistinguishable from a correct line without the rate card open beside it. This is the failure that makes monthly checking impractical by hand.

Wrong rate, drawn to scaleTwo nearly identical bars: $2,310.00 billed at $0.55 a unit against $2,100.00 at the contracted $0.50. The $210.00 gap is 9 percent of the line — five cents a unit, 4,200 times.Billed · 4,200 × $0.55$2,310.00Contract · 4,200 × $0.50$2,100.00Overbilled$210.00five cents a unit, one month · 9.1% of the line
4,200 units at $0.55 · the contract says $0.50

  4,200 × $0.55        = $2,310.00
  4,200 × $0.50        = $2,100.00
                         ---------
Overbilled                 $210.00

Five cents. One month.
UNIT_MISMATCH

Unit mismatch

Claimable

Billed in a unit the contract does not meter that work in. The rate may be perfectly correct for the unit used — the error is the unit itself, and it multiplies.

Why it happens
A pre-packed carton arrives and the system has no carton-level charge code, so it decomposes into individual picks. Every pick is priced correctly.

On the invoice
A quantity far larger than the month's activity, at a rate that checks out. The rate audit passes; the unit audit is the one that catches it.

Unit mismatch, drawn to scaleA full-width bar of $720.00 billed as 1,440 individual picks against a stub of $90.00 for the 40 cartons the contract meters. The $630.00 gap is 88 percent of the line.Billed as picks · 1,440 × $0.50$720.00As the contract meters it · 40 × $2.25$90.00Overbilled$630.00right rate, wrong unit · 87.5% of the line
40 pre-packed cartons of 36 units

Billed as individual picks
  1,440 × $0.50        = $720.00

As the contract meters it
  40 × $2.25           =  $90.00
                           --------
Overbilled                  $630.00

Right rate. Thirty-five charges too many, forty times over.
CHANNEL_MISRATE

Channel misrate

Claimable

Billed at a rate contracted for a different sales channel. B2B and DTC work is priced differently in most contracts.

Why it happens
Wholesale orders enter through the same pipeline as consumer orders and inherit the default rate card. Nothing flags them as different.

On the invoice
The total is plausible and the volumes are right. Only the mix is wrong, and the invoice does not show the mix.

Channel misrate, drawn to scale$405.00 billed at the direct-to-consumer rate against $198.00 at the contracted business rate: a $207.00 gap, 51 percent of the line.Billed at DTC · 180 × $2.25$405.00Contracted B2B · 180 × $1.10$198.00Overbilled$207.00compounds every month · 51.1% of the line
180 wholesale orders billed at DTC rates

  180 × $2.25          = $405.00
  180 × $1.10 (B2B)    = $198.00
                         --------
Overbilled                $207.00

Among the costliest errors auditors report, because it compounds
every month until someone looks at the mix.
MINIMUM_MISAPPLIED

Minimum misapplied

Claimable

A monthly minimum charged in a month whose activity already cleared it, so you pay the floor and the activity both.

Why it happens
The minimum is a separate charge code on a schedule. In a busy month nobody suppresses it, because suppressing it is a manual step.

On the invoice
One extra line on an invoice that already has six. It is the smallest line and the easiest to skim past.

Contract · $1,000.00 monthly minimum, as a floor

  Activity, priced       $3,796.35
  Minimum                $1,000.00

The floor is already cleared. No minimum line is due.

Overbilled               $1,000.00
QUANTITY_MISMATCH

Quantity mismatch

Claimable

Billed for activity that did not happen, or more of it than happened.

Why it happens
A batch reprocessed after a failed run, or a count taken before returns were netted off. The billing system reports what it was told.

On the invoice
The rate is right, the unit is right, the number is larger than your own records. This is the type that needs your activity data to catch.

Quantity mismatch, drawn to scale3,410 units invoiced against the 3,200 your records show. The 210 unit gap is 6 percent, and at $0.50 a unit it is $105.00.Invoiced · units picked3,410Your records · units picked3,200Overbilled by210210 units · $105.00 at $0.50 · 6.2% of the line
Invoice says 3,410 units picked · your records say 3,200

  210 × $0.50          = $105.00

Overbilled                $105.00

Only findable if the month's activity was recorded.
DUPLICATE

Duplicate

Claimable

The same charge appearing twice, in the same invoice or across two.

Why it happens
An invoice reissued after a correction, with the original never voided. Or one charge split across two codes that both bill in full.

On the invoice
Two lines with similar descriptions and identical amounts, often not adjacent. Easy to see when you look for it, easy to miss when reading down.

Duplicate, drawn to scaleTwo identical storage lines of $765.00 where the contract prices one. The second bar is the charge that should not exist.Charged · storage, twice$765.00× 2Due · one month of storage$765.00Overbilled$765.00the same charge, twice · half the charge
  Storage fees             $765.00
  Storage — Jan            $765.00
                         ---------
Overbilled                 $765.00
UNCONTRACTED_CHARGE

Uncontracted charge

Reported, not claimed

A charge with no basis anywhere in the rate card.

Why it happens
Value-added services quoted by email and never folded into the contract. Not bad faith — a quote that was agreed verbally and billed literally.

On the invoice
A line whose description does not correspond to anything in the agreement. Often the largest single unexplained amount.

Uncontracted charge, drawn to scale$315.00 charged for value-added services against nothing that any clause authorises. The whole line is unverifiable, which is not the same as wrong.Charged · value-added services$315.00Authorised by a clausenothing found$0.00Unverified$315.00reported, not claimed · the whole line
  Value-added services     $315.00

Authorising clause         none found
                           --------
Verified                     $0.00
Unverified                 $315.00

Reported as uncovered, not claimed. A charge that cannot be
matched to a clause is not thereby wrong — it is unverifiable,
and those are different.
UNBILLED_CHARGE

Unbilled charge

In your favour

The contract prices this work and the invoice never charged for it. The provider undercharged.

Why it happens
An incomplete invoice transcript more often than provider generosity — which is why it is worth knowing about.

On the invoice
An absence, which is the hardest thing to notice on a document. Only a priced-out month reveals it.

Unbilled charge, drawn to scale$116.35 of return processing the contract prices against nothing invoiced. The gap is in your favour and is never claimed.Priced by the contract$116.35Invoicednothing found$0.00Undercharged$116.35in your favour · never claimed · the whole line
  Return processing, contract    $116.35
  Return processing, invoiced      $0.00
                                 --------
Undercharged                     $116.35

Shown, never claimed. Asking would be asking to be invoiced.
It still matters for accruals.
UNEXPLAINED_VARIANCE

Unexplained variance

Reported, not claimed

The amount differs from what the contract and the activity imply, and no rule above accounts for the difference.

Why it happens
Anything. That is the point — the cause is not known.

On the invoice
A gap the engine can measure and cannot name.

Unexplained variance, drawn to scale$1,375.00 invoiced against $1,342.00 that the contract and the activity imply: a $33.00 gap the engine can measure and cannot name.Invoiced$1,375.00Contract and activity imply$1,342.00Variance$33.00measured, not named · 2.4% of the line
  Invoiced                     $1,375.00
  Contract and activity imply  $1,342.00
                               ---------
Variance                          $33.00

Kept as its own finding rather than filed under Wrong rate.
Asserting the rate is wrong when the cause is unknown is exactly
the kind of confident guess this engine exists to avoid.