Unbilled Gewährleistungs-Inspektions- und Diagnosearbeit durch fehlende Ticketing-Integration
Definition
ROFA and EWM warranty processes require written notification and investigation of claimed defects. This investigation phase generates labor costs (technician diagnostic time, parts testing, documentation review). Under § 438 BGB, warranty claims do not exist for: (a) improper use, (b) inadequate maintenance, (c) customer modifications without authorization, (d) natural wear, (e) external damage. When a claim falls into these categories, the manufacturer is not obligated to provide warranty repair but may still bill the customer for the inspection/diagnostic work performed. Manual workflow means claim rejection is not automatically linked to labor invoice generation; service teams often fail to track billable hours separately from non-billable warranty investigation. Additionally, no centralized system tracks which claims were rejected and when, making accounts receivable follow-up for unbilled inspection services ad-hoc and incomplete.
Key Findings
- Financial Impact: Diagnostic labor per claim: 2-5 hours × €75-€150/hour = €150-€750 per investigation; rejection rate: 15-25% of claims rejected due to out-of-warranty conditions; for 100 claims/month: 15-25 rejected claims × €150-€750 average diagnostic labor = €2,250-€18,750/month unbilled; annual leakage = €27,000-€225,000 per 100 claim/month volume per manufacturer.
- Frequency: Per rejected warranty claim; estimated 15-25% of all submitted claims
- Root Cause: No automated claim ticketing system linking labor time capture to claim status; service team focuses on repair delivery for approved claims, overlooking billing for rejected claim investigations; manual claim decision workflow means rejection determination is delayed, by which time diagnostic labor is already completed but not invoiced; accounts receivable does not have visibility into which claims were rejected and require billing
Why This Matters
This pain point represents a significant opportunity for B2B solutions targeting Commercial and Service Industry Machinery Manufacturing.
Affected Stakeholders
Service Technician (diagnostic labor), Accounts Receivable (invoice generation), Service Manager (claim outcome tracking), Finance (revenue recognition for service labor)
Deep Analysis (Premium)
Financial Impact
Financial data and detailed analysis available with full access. Unlock to see exact figures, evidence sources, and actionable insights.
Current Workarounds
Financial data and detailed analysis available with full access. Unlock to see exact figures, evidence sources, and actionable insights.
Get Solutions for This Problem
Full report with actionable solutions
- Solutions for this specific pain
- Solutions for all 15 industry pains
- Where to find first clients
- Pricing & launch costs
Methodology & Sources
Data collected via OSINT from regulatory filings, industry audits, and verified case studies.
Evidence Sources:
- [1] ROFA Group: warranty claims explicitly exclude improper use, maintenance failures, customer modifications, natural wear, external damage—all grounds for rejection with applicable billing
- [2] TELFA legal summary: § 438 BGB lists specific warranty exclusions; rejected claims do not trigger warranty obligation but inspection labor can still be billed
- [3] EWM Group: warranty claim process requires investigation but does not mention automatic billing rules for rejected claims
Related Business Risks
Verzögerte Schadensersatzbearbeitung durch mehrstufige manuelle Claim-Validierung
Haftungsrisiko durch unzureichende Dokumentation von Gewährleistungsansprüchen gemäß GoBD
Kostenerosion durch Reparatur- und Ersatzteilkosten bei verlängertem Claim-Prozess
Manuelle Claim-Triage als Kapazitätsbottleneck bei hochvolumigen Serviceabteilungen
Auftragsrückgang durch Lieferkettenunsicherheit und Zollrisiken
Kapazitätsauslastungsdefizit durch Bestell- und Konfigurationsverzögerungen
Request Deep Analysis
🇩🇪 Be first to access this market's intelligence