Eleven weeks is how long one charger claim took to close, and the analysis itself took four days. The rest of the time was spent establishing which batch the units came from, because the cartons carried a date but not the batch code that the factory’s records were indexed by.
This guide is part of our Programme Execution & After-sales. Read the full topic guide for the decisions that come before and after this step.
Charger RMA process: the steps
Five steps, and the second is the one that stalls claims.
The claim is raised with evidence, triaged against the batch record, given a disposition, analysed, and closed with a report. A process missing the triage step turns every claim into an investigation.
The claim that took eleven weeks
The evidence arrived after the units did.
The buyer reported a failure rate without the batch code, and the factory could not identify the production run. Both parties then worked backwards through shipping documents while the units sat in a warehouse, and the delay was administrative rather than technical.
Step one: the claim form and the evidence
Five fields, and the first three are on the carton.
The batch code, the model designation, the quantity affected, the symptom described in measurable terms, and the photographs or the test record. A claim carrying those five can be triaged on the day it arrives.
Step two: triage against the batch record
The batch code connects the claim to the test data.
The record shows the components used, the test station results, the operator and the date. Where the affected units share a component lot with a known issue, the claim is confirmed from the record rather than from the returned goods, which is what makes a same-day disposition possible.
Step three: the disposition decision
Four outcomes, and each carries a different cost.
Credit the units, replace them, request the return of a sample, or decline the claim with the evidence attached. The decision belongs to the supply agreement rather than to the correspondence, and a threshold written into the agreement removes most of the debate.
| Step | Input | Output | Typical time |
|---|---|---|---|
| Claim raised | Batch code and evidence | A complete claim record | Same day |
| Triage | The batch record | Confirmed, likely or declined | One to two days |
| Disposition | The supply agreement | Credit, replacement or sample request | Two to five days |
| Analysis | The returned sample | A failure report with the root cause | One to two weeks |
| Closure | The report and the corrective action | A closed claim and a change | Same week as the report |
Step four: the analysis and the report
The report answers three questions and stops.
What failed, why it failed, and what changes so that it does not fail again. A report that continues into an assessment of the buyer’s handling stops being an analysis and starts being a negotiation, which is why the three questions are kept separate from the remedy.
What to track each quarter
Four numbers, and the second is the one that predicts trouble.
The claim rate by volume, the claim rate by batch, the average time to close, and the number of claims that produced a design or process change. A rising rate on a single batch is a production signal; a rising rate across batches is a design signal. The fourth number is the one that shows whether the process is working, because a programme that closes claims without changing anything is measuring the same failure repeatedly.
Where RMA claims stall
Three patterns, and the first is the most common.
An incomplete claim form, a disposition that the agreement did not cover, and an analysis that waits for a sample that was never returned. Each is prevented by a form, a threshold and a shipping instruction rather than by escalation.
How the claim record feeds the next order
A closed claim produces two outputs: the remedy for the customer and the change for the process. The second is what the next order is built with, and a claim that closes without one is a claim that will be raised again on the same platform.
The record also becomes the reference for the inspection. Where a batch failed for a known reason, the incoming inspection for the following shipment tests that point specifically rather than repeating a general check.
Keeping the two together means the rate can be recalculated without asking the factory for the history. A programme that maintains its own claim log can compare suppliers on the same measure rather than on impressions. The log also shortens the next claim, because the disposition, the documents and the closing report have the same shape each time. It is kept per platform rather than per order.
FAQ
Does every claim need the units returned?
No. A credit is usually settled on the batch record and the evidence, and a sample is requested where the cause is unknown or the rate is above the agreed threshold. The exception is a claim where the failure mode is unknown, because the sample is what turns an unexplained rate into a cause and a change. A sample is also requested where the batch record is incomplete, because the record cannot then be used to settle the count.
What is a reasonable time to close a claim?
The disposition is usually same week and the analysis within two to three weeks where a sample is returned. Anything longer usually reflects a missing batch code rather than a difficult failure. Set the two targets separately in the agreement: the time to a disposition and the time to a report, because the second depends on the sample arriving. State the period in which the report is expected, so that a slow analysis is visible before it becomes a dispute.
Who pays the return freight?
Follows the reason for the failure. Where the claim is confirmed, the supplier normally covers it; where the sample is requested for investigation, the cost is agreed when the request is made. Name the party that arranges the collection as well, since a claim that stalls waiting for a pickup instruction is stalled on administration rather than on the failure.
Should the corrective action be reported back?
It should, because it is the evidence that the loop was closed. A report without a change is an explanation, and the same claim usually returns on the next order. Ask for the change in writing with the date it takes effect, because a corrective action applied to the next run is what prevents the same claim on the following order.
Next step
Send the product, the batch coding and the claim threshold you need to Wecent Group through the contact page. The reply sets out the claim form, the triage route and the report the analysis produces. Related reading: charger quality control, our charger factory and charger manufacturing services. External references: BSI standards, IEC standards, UL solutions, Intertek testing services, EU WEEE Directive and EU RoHS Directive.