A request with a two-week deadline
A client's insurer is reviewing their motor fleet policy and asks for evidence: licence checks for all drivers in the last year, service and MOT records for every vehicle, the fleet policy and proof drivers accepted it, accident records and any driver training. The client asks you, since you manage their fleet.
Your team spends days exporting from the fleet system, the licence check portal, the training provider and a folder of signed forms, then formatting it all into something presentable. Some gaps appear, and there is a scramble to explain them.
Why assembling evidence is slow
The records exist. They were just never meant to be presented together.
- Evidence is spread across the fleet system, licence check provider, training provider, accident records and document folders.
- Each source exports in its own format.
- Requests are specific: a period, a set of drivers, a site.
- Gaps only become visible when someone tries to assemble the whole picture.
- Every request is handled from scratch.
The cost of scrambling
Team time taken away from running fleets. Deadlines that are tight for the client. Gaps discovered at the worst moment. And the client's confidence in their fleet manager depends on how quickly and cleanly this is done.
The evidence packs we build
- Records from each source are linked to the client, vehicle and driver they belong to: licence checks, services, MOTs, defects, accidents, policy sign-offs, training.
- A pack is requested by choosing a client, a period and optionally a set of sites, vehicles or drivers, and the items the requester wants.
- The pack is generated as a summary with a section for each item, and each line links to or includes the source record.
- Gaps are listed at the front, such as drivers with no check in the period or vehicles with an overdue service, so they can be explained honestly rather than discovered by the reader.
- Packs are produced as PDF and spreadsheet, and can be shared through a secure link that expires.
- A regular health check runs the same queries each month and warns you of gaps before anyone asks.
| Evidence item | Source | Shown as |
|---|---|---|
| Licence checks | Licence check provider | Driver, date, result |
| Services and MOTs | Fleet system and supplier invoices | Vehicle, due date, completed date |
| Policy sign-off | Sign-off portal | Driver, version, date accepted |
| Training | Training provider | Driver, module, completion date |
Showing the gaps, not hiding them
A pack that hides gaps does more harm than good if the reader finds them. So packs show exceptions clearly, with any reason recorded. We do not decide whether a client's fleet meets any standard. The pack presents the records as they are, and what they mean is for the client, their insurer or their auditor.
Evidence requests answered in an afternoon
Say the request asks for the last twelve months for two sites. Your team picks the client, the period and the sites, and the pack builds in minutes. The front page lists three gaps: a driver whose licence check was late because his consent lapsed, a van whose service was a fortnight overdue while it waited for parts, and a new starter who has not yet signed the latest policy. Each already has a note explaining what happened, recorded at the time, so the client can send the pack with confidence.
When a request arrives, your team generates the pack, reviews the gaps with the client and sends it. The monthly health check means gaps are usually known and already being dealt with. Clients see you as the people who can answer these questions quickly, which is a large part of why they pay a fleet manager.
Do evidence requests become a scramble?
- Evidence requests take days to assemble.
- Records come from several systems in different formats.
- Gaps are discovered while assembling a pack.
- Each request is handled from scratch.
- Clients rely on you for insurer and audit reviews.