Proof of delivery disputes: what a signature does and does not settle

What a clean signature actually establishes

Carriage regimes treat acceptance of goods without reservation as evidence, usually rebuttable, that the consignment was delivered in the condition and quantity stated on the transport document. In road carriage under the international convention, the absence of reservations at delivery supports a presumption that the goods were received as described in the consignment note. In air carriage, receipt without complaint by the person entitled to delivery is prima facie evidence of delivery in good condition. That is a presumption, not a conclusion. A claimant can still prove a shortage, but it must now do so against a document that says otherwise, and the practical burden of doing that with warehouse records alone is heavy. This is why the reservation, written at the moment of acceptance, is worth more than any amount of later correspondence.

How disputes typically arise

The recurring patterns are recognisable. A driver delivers to a busy site where nobody counts, and a shortage appears days later during putaway. Goods are signed for by someone without authority, or by a person at a neighbouring unit. Pallets are exchanged or restacked in transit so that the piece count no longer matches the note. A consolidated load is split at a cross-dock and part is misrouted. Or a delivery is left in an agreed safe place and later disappears. Each pattern has a different answer, which is why classifying disputes by pattern is more useful than treating them as a single category. Repeated shortages on one route, one shift or one customer point to something specific rather than to random loss.

Reservations: the words that preserve a claim

A useful reservation is specific. Recording that a consignment was received unchecked, or noting the exact number of pallets short, the damage observed and the packaging condition, preserves a position in a way that a scrawled unreadable mark does not. Where the driver disputes the reservation, both accounts should be recorded and the sender notified immediately. Timing rules matter as much as wording. Apparent loss or damage generally has to be raised at the moment of acceptance, while damage that is not apparent attracts a short written notice window that varies by regime. Receiving sites should therefore have a standing instruction that covers both situations, including what to write when there is genuinely no time to count.

Electronic proof of delivery and its evidential gaps

Electronic capture improves speed and retrieval but does not automatically improve evidence. A defensible electronic record identifies the person signing by name and role, timestamps the event, captures location, links to the consignment and piece count rather than to a stop, retains any photographs taken, and stores an audit trail showing that the record was not altered afterwards. A signature scribbled on a screen with none of that attached proves very little. The most common gap is the piece count. Where the device asks only for a signature per stop, a shortage cannot be resolved from the record at all, and the dispute reverts to competing recollections. Capturing quantity and any exception at the point of signature is the design change that resolves most cases.

Resolving a dispute and preventing the next one

Investigation should follow the physical trail rather than the correspondence: the loading record and outturn from the origin site, the vehicle's telematics and stop timings, weighbridge data where available, camera footage at both ends, the seal record, and the driver's own statement taken early. Where a shortage is genuine and localised, the recovery route runs through the carriage regime with its notice periods and capped compensation, or through insurance. Prevention is mostly process. Named authorised recipients per site, a standing reservation instruction, mandatory piece count capture, seal verification, and a routine review of exception patterns by route and shift will remove most recurring disputes. How a particular case is decided still depends on the contract, the regime that applies to the movement and the forum.

Frequently asked questions

Is an electronic signature as good as a paper one?

It can be better, provided the record identifies the signatory by name and role, timestamps and locates the event, links to the piece count and any exception, retains photographs and shows that it has not been altered. A bare signature capture without those attributes proves little.

What should a receiver write when there is no time to count?

A reservation stating that the consignment was received unchecked and that quantity and condition are subject to verification, made before the driver leaves and communicated in writing to the carrier. Regimes also set a short window for notifying damage discovered later.

Does a signature by anyone at the address count?

Disputes frequently turn on the authority of the person who signed. Maintaining a list of authorised recipients per delivery point, and requiring name and role at capture, removes an argument that is otherwise difficult to settle after the fact.