SCAR (Supplier Corrective Action request) Charge Back

SCAR charge back

  • YES, my customers are doing this

    Votes: 6 40.0%
  • NO, My customers are not doing this

    Votes: 7 46.7%
  • NA - I'm a consultant but want to see the poll results.

    Votes: 2 13.3%

  • Total voters
    15

gpainter

Quite Involved in Discussions
#1
Scar Charge Back

We supply a company that has instituted a SCAR charge back program as follows:
1st offense no chage
2nd offense $125
3rd offense $250
4th offense $500
5th offense $1000

This is all for the same issue and is in addition to labor and overhead for rework at customers location
-GET YOU WHERE IT HURTS STRATEGY??????
 
Last edited:
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

Mike S.

Happy to be Alive
Trusted Information Resource
#2
In over 10 years I have occasionally had a customer want to charge me their internal labor and overhead rate ($30-50/hour) to sort supposedly "defective" product on their end. Their argument was that they needed the (good) parts NOW and did not have time to ship them back to us for sorting. So, they wanted us to pay the labor. If it was a good customer and we felt they had a legitimate gripe, we'd usually agree. Sometimes, though, the legitimacy of the gripe came into play. On occasion, the parts would meet all specifications but still "didn't work" in the customer's device. The customer was unsure how to spec. the parts to eliminate the problem. In cases like this, which thankfully were rare, we'd simply do a credit and replace as a customer satisfaction type thing.

In your example, they seem to want the supplier to pay a reasonable fixed $ penalty for any repeat screw-up's (corrective action failures). Fairly applied, I'm not sure I'd have any problem with that.

It will be interesting to see other opinions.

Mike S.
 
E

energy

#4
Yea Right

The Supplier would have to really want you as a Customer to allow that. What I have seen is that the supplier will increase his prices to compensate for that eventuality. If there are a lot of Suppliers providing the same service, fine. If it's a one of a kind product, you're screwed. :p :ko: :smokin:
 

CarolX

Super Moderator
Super Moderator
#5
we've seen it

G-

On occasion, we have a customer that wants to charge us back for rework/sorting, etc. Here's a good one....we have one customer who was charging us $75 for ANY error on our end. An invoice error would result in a $75 charge. I think they have since stoped this policy, it backfired on them. Suppliers started "no quoting" their RFQ's.

CarolX
 
#6
I agree. There should be a fair solution to handling defective product sent to the cuctomer. Why should the customer always bear the brunt of the cost of defective product.
As I see it, IMHO, the supplier has four choices;

1- have the defective product returned,
2- go sort the product for the customer,
3- ask the customer to sort the product,
4- submit a deviation to use-as-is.

Each phase has a cost and should be determined based on the impact to the customer.
Naturally this only applies to customer/supplier agreed upon specifications.
 

Marc

Hunkered Down for the Duration
Staff member
Admin
#7
This is nothing new to my experience, but it is increasing as companies are better able to track what's happening. You know - someone gets smart and decides to match chargebacks against NCRs, etc. Their systems a reaching a point where they can cost an incident.

Those of us in Automotive (a heavenly employment field for career masochists!) know what it costs to shut a plant down because they got a batch of defectives and can't build. Now we is talkin' REAL money, cowboy!

The important thing here is that during contract review this is negotiated as well as PPM and triggers. What if the customer decides to change basic measureables or decides to impose a lower PPM requirement than originally agreed upon? Are you forcing them back through contract review? And all too often upstairs and/or sales deals are made which the company really can't meet.

Oh, my. This is all getting just TOO complicated!

This is sorta where I was coming from in http://Elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=4669
 
#8
Cooperation

I have actually held both ends of this stick in previous jobs...

As a customer

Every now and then we detected a defective batch of this or that, and if we needed the parts "right now" we found ourselves in major trouble (Automotive industry, and like Mark says it costs serious money to shut down). If it was possible we had the parts reworked. This could be done either by us ( We then charged the supplier for the labour - after agreement, mind you) or by the supplier, on our premises. The latter was the preferred course of action, but often impossible due to the time factor.

Of course, we returned defective parts when there was time to do that...


As a supplier:

Same as above. It was sometimes impossible to get the parts back to us for rework and then return them to the customer in time to keep production running. We then agreed to pay for the rework operations.

I find little need for the penalty fees in gpainters example. If you work in a "just in time" environment the stink thrown up in cases like this are forbidding enough. Neither side wants it repeated, and a penalty on top of it all does not exactly promote cooperation.

/Claes
 
T

tomvehoski

#9
I would be very careful with this customer. What is their history for blaming you for problems when it is really their fault? I can agree with an ACCURATE labor chargeback for rework or sorting, and possibly an "administrative fee" to cover the time lost on paperwork, debits, corrective actions, etc. I don't like the punitive nature of it.

I used to live with this as an SQE making toy trains. Our plant manager had the mentality of "always the supplier's fault". Best example - we used styrofoam for packaging. We had to give 3 days notice to supplier to mold and allow for drying (molded with steam). We call supplier, need 5000 pieces tomorrow. Supplier says no - our production schedule says we don't need for four days. They are molded, but need 2-3 days to air dry. Apparently we doubled production but never told the supplier of the change. Plant Manager - ship anyway, we will let dry here. Shipment arrives next day. Plant Manager blows up because foam is wet and cannot be packed. Tries to assign people to dry with paper towels. Does not work, many pieces damaged. Plant manager tries to bill supplier for cost of rework at $40/hr (workers made about $8) for a total of around $5000. Invoice for shipment was only about $2000. Supplier told us - too bad, we are not making any more parts for you - we are losing money with your chargebacks and rejects. By the way, we own the tools, so good luck getting your packing material any time soon. Luckily myself and Purchasing got involved to smooth things over or we would have had huge problems. I always loved being in the middle of those disputes.
 
C

Craig H.

#10
We are seeing it, too.

The thing is, from where I sit, the "chargeback systems" we see, without fail, provide little or no information as to the real nature of the problem. Often the forms don't have a contact name of someone who is familiar with the problem, are unclear as to which site is concerned, and arrive 2 - 3 months after the problem happened, making any attempt at preventing recurrance difficult, if not impossible. Isn't that what the whole system is supposed to do? Or, is it a sneaky way for customers to write themselves a discount every now and again?

I have no argument with the idea that we should take responsibility for our errors. That said, SCAR chargebacks are one of those ideas that sound great, but all too often the implementation stinks, in my experience with them. They are a copout all the way around, and ARE NOT a substitute for adequate, timely, communications. Satisfying the system becomes the goal, not working to make great products for the end user.

Gee, that felt good. A little rant is nice every once in a while.

Craig
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
S SCAR (Supplier Corrective Action Request) Timeliness & Issuance Supplier Quality Assurance and other Supplier Issues 3
K Suppliers not responding to Supplier Corrective Action Requests (SCAR) Supplier Quality Assurance and other Supplier Issues 12
N How Can I Respond to this SCAR (Supplier Corrective Action Request)? Nonconformance and Corrective Action 15
C Using SAP for SCAR (Supplier Corrective Action Reports) Quality Assurance and Compliance Software Tools and Solutions 2
C SCAR (Supplier Corrective Action Request) as part of NC/CAPA? Nonconformance and Corrective Action 3
R To SCAR or not to SCAR (Supplier Corrective Action Request) Supplier Quality Assurance and other Supplier Issues 7
S Supplier Corrective Action Request (SCAR) Ignored by Supplier ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 9
S Supplier Corrective Action Request (SCAR) vs. Corrective Action Request (CAR) Food Safety - ISO 22000, HACCP (21 CFR 120) 15
B Supplier Corrective Action Request (SCAR) - criteria Supplier Quality Assurance and other Supplier Issues 2
L SCAR (Supplier Corrective Acton Request) Responses - How much do you tell? Nonconformance and Corrective Action 8
K SCAR (Supplier Corrective Action Request) Major and Minor Classification Nonconformance and Corrective Action 4
Q SCAR Form - Does anyone have an example of a Supplier Corrective Action form? Supplier Quality Assurance and other Supplier Issues 1
T World Class Supplier Quality Alert System CAR/SCAR By Email Quality Assurance and Compliance Software Tools and Solutions 2
R To SCAR or not to SCAR? First Article with a new supplier fails Supplier Quality Assurance and other Supplier Issues 3
Q SCAR Process SCAR that works for Class III Medical Device Supplier Management Supplier Quality Assurance and other Supplier Issues 4
M Multiple missed POs grounds for SCAR? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 32
M Help with SCAR - Not all sub-assemblies had properly received a First Article Nonconformance and Corrective Action 2
Q Global SCAR Software System Recommendations Quality Assurance and Compliance Software Tools and Solutions 2
J How I should format a SCAR Cover Letter? SQE asking for advice ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 12
D Multiple Discrepancies put on one SCAR Quality Manager and Management Related Issues 5
K Customer issues invalid SCAR and Chargeback every March Customer Complaints 6
A Shall we raise SCAR/CAR for every defect as per our current procedure? Nonconformance and Corrective Action 4
J When should Material RMA be escalated to a SCAR? Supplier Quality Assurance and other Supplier Issues 4
D Lean SCAR Process and Form needed - ISO 13485 and FDA ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 8
ScottK As an ISO9001 auditor what would you say about this of this (open SCAR situation): ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 3
D Approved supplier list for R&D ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 1
M SemaTech SSQA Standardized Supplier Quality Assessment - my favorite tool ever Manufacturing and Related Processes 0
D Supplier Quality level category help - high level ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 6
J Supplier Controlled Shipping (GM CS1) Condition Manufacturing and Related Processes 3
L Supplier within the Organization ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 5
D Supplier Quality - How to classify a supplier level Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 7
F Supplier Quality Assurance Job Openings - 8/2020 Job Openings, Consulting and Employment Opportunities 0
P Understanding DFMEA and PFMEA - Supplier Related IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 21
S Can assembly manufacturing sub-supplier be certified IATF 16949? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 6
M How Supplier Capacity check is done by competitors Manufacturing and Related Processes 0
C One Time Service Supplier - Temperature and Humidity Testing Service ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 5
M Supplier Audits - Stop Wasting Everyone's Time! General Auditing Discussions 15
G Supplier management when the supplier is your headquarter IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
V Supplier wants to perform pre-qualifications prior to every run instead of locking in parameters. Supplier Quality Assurance and other Supplier Issues 7
D Class 3 Device - Change of supplier of material Canada Medical Device Regulations 6
D List A IVD - Change to material supplier EU Medical Device Regulations 3
J Minimum Supplier Certifications for Food Supplements Food Safety - ISO 22000, HACCP (21 CFR 120) 3
R Supplier/Vendor Surveys (360) Supplier Quality Assurance and other Supplier Issues 1
was named killer AS9100 Supplier Approval Requirements AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 10
B AS9100 8.4.1 Supplier Selection/Evaluation criteria and reevaluations AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 13
J Sub-supplier change from manual to automated process - same specs - Report to FDA? 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 2
M Supplier Audit Report - Template for second party audit wanted Lean in Manufacturing and Service Industries 1
T Difference between a subcontractor and a supplier ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 21
Ed Panek Corona Virus impact on Supplier Audits and Received Parts ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 4
NDesouza Verification of Supplier RCCAs Nonconformance and Corrective Action 5

Similar threads

Top Bottom