Does ConPDS replace an M&R system?

No. ConPDS adds the evidence layer underneath the M&R workflow. When distribution rules are configured, it can send repair packages into AEMS, DepotMaster, EOS, IMARS, OVMR, FIS, custom APIs, email, FTP/SFTP, or guest portal access without replacing the operational system.

CATEGORY DEFINITION

Container Repair Evidence System

A repair evidence system is the lifecycle record behind M&R work — not a folder of finished-work photos. It answers: what condition existed before tools touched the damage, what was done, what was fitted, and who received the package.

For M&R and claims leaders: what record lifecycle supports repair review? Pre-repair baseline, work-in-progress, post-repair completion, spare-part serials where relevant, work-order context, and logged counterparty distribution — all linked to a validated container number.

Built for M&R teams, repair workshops, reefer facilities, depot operators, leasing-company stakeholders, and shipping-line repair workflows.

Explore repair claim documentation →

Category hub → commercial claim-defence workflow on repair claim documentation

What Makes Repair Evidence Defensible?

Repair evidence is defensible when it proves the condition before repair, documents the work while it happens, shows the completed state, links the record to the correct container and work order, and preserves who accessed or received the package. Photos alone are not enough if they cannot be matched, retrieved, or explained when challenged. Exact evidence expectations still follow the applicable contract and counterparty process.

Pre-repair baseline before tools touch the damage

Work-in-progress evidence tied to the repair line and work order

Post-repair completion state captured before release or gate-out

Spare part serial number capture for reefer, mechanical, and warranty-sensitive repair

Continuous audit trail for capture, review, distribution, retrieval, and counterparty access

Why Repair Charges Get Written Off

Most written-off repair charges are not caused by the repair being wrong. They are caused by evidence that is incomplete, late, misfiled, disconnected from the work order, or impossible to produce quickly when the counterparty disputes the line item — photos in a phone gallery, the work order in the M&R system, and completion shots in a chat thread.

For the full write-off / disputed-charge commercial workflow — defending a charge you raised, or contesting one raised against you — see repair claim documentation.

REPAIR EVIDENCE SPINE

One Repair Record From Baseline to Package

The repair file is strongest when every phase stays tied to the same validated container number and work order, instead of being rebuilt from separate photos, folders, or messages.

Container number + work order Shared anchor across every repair phase

Baseline Condition before tools touch the damage.

Work Order Repair line, estimate, and operational context.

In Progress Evidence while the repair is being performed.

Completion Post-repair proof before release or gate-out.

Package Counterparty-ready record when distribution is configured.

What the System Must Capture

CONDITION BASELINE

Before the Repair Starts

The pre-repair state proves what was present before the workshop touched the container. Without it, a later dispute becomes an argument about memory rather than evidence.

REPAIR PROGRESSION

During the Work

Work-in-progress photos support that the repair line was necessary and performed, and that it ties to the work order — especially for hidden damage, structural work, and reefer components.

COMPLETION + PARTS

Before Release

The finished-condition record closes the file. Spare-part serials where relevant support warranty and component disputes that a finish photo alone cannot answer.

DISTRIBUTION HISTORY

Who Received the Evidence

When packages are sent under configured rules or shared via guest access, log who received what and when — so “we never got it” is answered with a trail, not recollection.

Where This Category Shows Up

The same lifecycle supports workshop operations and the financial side of repair — without replacing the M&R system of record.

Repair claim defence Off-hire disputes Warranty evidence Reefer component / serial records AEMS / DMS distribution (when rules configured) Guest portal access

How ConPDS Checker Implements This Category

ConPDS Checker captures repair evidence on standard smartphones, validates the ISO 6346 container number at capture (retake or manual entry when recognition is wrong), attaches records to the repair workflow, and — when distribution rules are configured — sends packages to shipping-line, DMS, M&R, guest portal, email, FTP/SFTP, or API destinations with success or failure logged. It does not replace your M&R system. For defending or contesting a charge commercially, use the repair claim documentation workflow page.

Repair Evidence FAQ

What is a container repair evidence system? ▲

It is the structured system that captures, matches, retains, distributes, and retrieves the evidence behind repair charges. The core record includes pre-repair, in-progress, and post-repair evidence tied to the validated container number and work order — plus spare-part serials where relevant. For the commercial claim-defence workflow, see repair claim documentation.

Why do repair disputes need a dedicated evidence system? ▲

Repair disputes often fail because the evidence is split between phone galleries, chat threads, work orders, email attachments, and M&R systems. A dedicated evidence system keeps the repair record matched from baseline to completion and makes it retrievable by container number, work order, date, depot, or counterparty.

Does ConPDS replace our M&R system? ▲

No. ConPDS adds the evidence layer underneath the repair workflow. When distribution rules are configured, packages can go into AEMS, DMS platforms, email, FTP/SFTP, custom APIs, and guest portal access without displacing the operational system.

Which repair evidence should be captured? ▲

A useful record typically includes the pre-repair baseline, work-in-progress stages, completed repair state, close-ups of damage and replaced components, spare part serial numbers where relevant, capture timestamp and user identity, container number validation, and distribution history when packages are sent. Exact photo sets still follow the applicable contract and counterparty process.

Is this only for reefer repair? ▲

No. Reefer repair benefits strongly because technical evidence and spare part serial numbers matter, but the same system applies to dry container repair, structural repair, wash-related damage, lease return repair disputes, and off-hire claim defence.

Define the lifecycle — then run the claim workflow

This page owns what a repair evidence system is. When you need to defend or contest a charge commercially, continue to the repair claim documentation workflow.

See the repair claim workflow →