Data processing: generic control systems or specific application – Specific application – apparatus or process – Article handling
Reexamination Certificate
1999-05-12
2004-03-09
Patel, Ramesh (Department: 2121)
Data processing: generic control systems or specific application
Specific application, apparatus or process
Article handling
C700S216000, C700S232000, C700S236000, C705S002000, C705S040000
Reexamination Certificate
active
06704612
ABSTRACT:
FIELD OF THE INVENTION
The present invention relates to a computer processing system for a shipment transaction involving a shipper and a carrier.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
Processing shipment transactions between a shipper and a carrier has been a manually intensive effort and has experienced little change. Generally, the shipment transaction process involves a goods transport path and a payment process path. The goods transport path typically starts when a carrier picks up the goods at the shipper's warehouse dock. The carrier receives a copy of a transaction document, sometimes referred to as a bill of lading (BOL), from the shipper. This type of transaction document includes information associated with the shipment transaction which is used by the shipper and carrier to track the shipment of goods. The carrier transports the goods to the receiver where the receiver signs a copy of the BOL to verify receipt of the goods. After the carrier has delivered the goods to the receiver, the carrier also submits the receiver's signed copy of the BOL to the carrier's headquarters.
The payment process path starts when the carrier picks up the goods from the shipper. The carrier sends a copy of the BOL to the carrier's headquarters for processing. The carrier headquarters rates the BOL. Rating involves determining the shipment cost which takes into the account various shipment parameters such as the size, weight, type of material, and destination of the shipment. The carrier creates an invoice, sets up an accounts receivable, and sends the invoice to the shipper's accounts payable department. The shipper, either internally or via a third party, audits the invoice to ensure the final cost is proper.
One of the more burdensome aspects of the traditional process involves reaching agreement as to the final cost. If there is a dispute as to final cost, the shipper and carrier begin a burdensome and sometimes lengthy negotiation process in an attempt to settle the dispute. If the dispute is resolved, the shipper sets up an accounts payable for the transaction. The shipper will then send payment to the carrier and clear the accounts payable. Traditionally, the process for paying the carrier and clearing the accounts payable involves several manually intensive steps. Upon receipt of payment, the carrier clears the accounts receivable. Traditionally, the process for clearing an accounts receivable includes the carrier manually inputting final payment information into the accounts receivable system.
The traditional approach can lead to many disadvantages for a transaction between one shipper and one carrier. Typically, however, there are multiple carriers and shippers involved in multiple transactions, which makes the situation more complex, and that much more slow and inefficient. The process is manually intensive in that it relies on the hard copy of the BOL for proof of delivery and payment, resulting in a series of repetitive and time consuming steps. Also, each BOL is often rated multiple times by multiple parties creating excessive redundancy.
Traditional shipment transaction systems are also highly susceptible to billing errors and fraud. For example, there is no connection between the delivery of goods and when the shipper is billed for delivery. This may result in double billing, no billing at all, or overbilling the shipper for freight delivery charges. Also, auditing error may occur which results in incorrect billing or payment. In addition, the carrier waits a disproportionately long time for payment while the invoice is being audited and/or disputed. For example, traditionally, a delivery takes about five days whereas payment takes about thirty days. This unnecessary delay adversely affects the carrier's working capital resources.
Additional costs arise as a result of the existing inefficiencies. Many of the costs are individually small, but very large in the aggregate. For example, the carrier incurs administrative costs including: the cost to create and deliver the initial invoice, costs of resolving billing disputes, costs of providing a signed copy of the BOL to the shipper, and costs of posting accounts receivable. The shipper incurs similar administrative costs.
An additional disadvantage involves the inability to obtain immediate information regarding a shipment. Since the process is largely conducted manually, it is very difficult to track a shipment. To learn of the status of shipment or payment, there are various manual steps involved. For example, if the shipper wants to know if the carrier delivered the goods and if the payment has been made, the shipper must call the carrier and the appropriate financial institution.
There have been numerous attempts to improve the existing shipment and payment process. Some improvements have been made to each separate step of completing a shipment transaction, but the entire method remains relatively unchanged. For example, freight agents are used by shippers to schedule shipments and to process the invoice from the carrier. Also, third party service providers have taken over the role of managing the shipper's accounts payable department.
Another attempt to improve this burdensome transaction process involves the use of the Internet. Carriers have offered Internet access to their shipment information. Shippers access the carrier's Internet address and find out the immediate status of the shipment. A disadvantage of this system arises when, as in many applications, the shipper is using multiple carriers. In this typical situation, the shipper separately accesses the address of each carrier in order to find out the status of each shipment. This is unduly time consuming.
Another disadvantage of traditional systems is that the shipper's reference number and the carrier's reference number are not compatible. The carrier maintains the shipment data, so the shipper accesses the data using the carrier's reference number rather than the shipper's reference number. The shipper and carrier track each shipment using multiple reference numbers.
These various attempts to improve the overall process have fallen short of providing a convenient and cost effective system to process a shipment transaction.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
According to one application, the present invention is directed to a shipment transaction system for processing transaction information related to goods shipped from a shipper by a carrier. The system comprises a means for accepting shipment information at the shipper's premises. The system provides a data processing means at the shipper's premises, responsive to the shipment information, arranged and configured to generate a set of transaction information. The transaction information includes information associated with the carrier and the time at which the shipment is initiated at the shipper's premises. The system uses a central processor arrangement, responsive to the transaction information, and located remote from the shipper's premises, for processing selective information regarding the shipment. The system provides means for informing the central processor arrangement of delivery of goods by the carrier. The central processor arrangement, responsive to informing means, using the transaction information to audit the shipment transaction and payment thereof.
The above summary of the present invention is not intended to describe each illustrated embodiment, or every illustrates implementation, of the present invention. This is the purpose of the figures and of the detailed description that follows.
REFERENCES:
patent: 4114027 (1978-09-01), Slater et al.
patent: 4270042 (1981-05-01), Case
patent: 4305059 (1981-12-01), Benton
patent: 4412287 (1983-10-01), Braddock, III
patent: 4567359 (1986-01-01), Lockwood
patent: 4713761 (1987-12-01), Sharpe et al.
patent: 4725719 (1988-02-01), Oncken et al.
patent: 4750119 (1988-06-01), Cohen et al.
patent: 4926325 (1990-05-01), Benton et al.
patent: 4949272 (1990-08-01), Vanourek et al.
patent: 4960981 (
Patel Ramesh
U.S. Bancorp
LandOfFree
Transaction validation system for auditing and method does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with Transaction validation system for auditing and method, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Transaction validation system for auditing and method will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-3264070