How we saved a logistics project in March 2024
In March 2024, we were faced with the task of settling a dispute that was paralyzing one of the larger transshipment hubs in Greater Poland. Three transport companies and a terminal operator stopped talking to each other, which threatened to completely block component deliveries for a factory near Poznań.
Flashpoint: 230,850 PLN penalty
The conflict started with a mundane problem with the notification of 47 containers that got stuck at the transshipment yard between March 12 and 18, 2024. The terminal operator, sticking strictly to the 2021 regulations, issued debit notes for a total of 230,850 PLN. The carriers responded by immediately halting a further 14 transports, claiming that the terminal's IT system rejected their reports without stating a reason. Each party had its own server logs showing completely different event times. It was a classic stalemate where the emotions of the transport company owners began to outweigh economic calculations.
When we entered the game on March 22, the situation was critical. The factory, waiting for parts, announced that if the problem was not resolved by March 25, it would terminate the contract with the entire consortium. We looked for touchpoints, but at first we only heard mutual accusations of incompetence. Our team, which included 3 mediators, had to quickly separate hard facts from the subjective feelings of the dispute participants. We didn't promise miracles, but we proposed an architecture of compromise based on technical data rather than the interpretation of lawyers who had already started preparing lawsuits for the commercial court.
In logistics disputes, facts win over emotions, provided that both sides look at the same Excel sheet.
Strategic session and 4 hours of truth
We organized the first joint session on March 26 in a rented room at Roosevelta St. in Poznań. 7 people participated: owners of the three transport companies, the terminal's operations director, and their main logisticians. Instead of reading legal clauses, we asked for a comparison of truck entry times with recordings from gate number 4. It turned out that the differences in logs resulted from a time synchronization error on one of the servers by exactly 11 minutes. Those eleven minutes decided whether a given transport was considered late or within the time window. For 4 hours we analyzed case by case, which allowed us to reject 32 out of 47 disputed debit notes.
The joint analysis showed that no one was acting in bad faith. A system bug was hidden deep in the code of the notification app, which the terminal had updated at the beginning of February. Chodkiewicz & Partners mediators served as technical facilitators here. We had to calm tempers when one of the carriers started calculating fuel losses resulting from idling at the gate. We looked for touchpoints that would allow everyone involved to save face. It was not a time to point fingers, but to save a cooperation that had lasted for 6 years and until now had brought everyone stable profits.
The architecture of compromise in practice
The result of our actions was the signing of a settlement on March 29, 2024, at exactly 15:45. The final amount of penalties was reduced from the initial 230,850 PLN to 42,300 PLN, which represented only the cost of real additional staff shifts at the terminal. The carriers agreed to cover these costs jointly, and the terminal operator in exchange guaranteed them priority transshipment windows for the next 3 months. Importantly, the factory near Poznań received the goods on time and did not impose its own contractual penalties, which could have amounted to 15,000 PLN for each hour of production line downtime.
For us, this project confirmed that 8 years of experience in mediation allows us to see details that judges in courts miss. Instead of waiting 3 years for a verdict, the parties closed the matter in 18 days. Of course, we are not the cheapest mediation firm in the region, but the cost of our work represented only 7% of the amount saved on contractual penalties alone. We build the architecture of compromise because we know that in business operational continuity counts, not who has the better lawyer in the courtroom. After this mediation, the consortium survived and in June 2024 signed an annex for another 2 years of cooperation.
The settlement signed after 18 days saved a contract worth 1.2 million PLN per year.
How to avoid similar disputes?
From the experience of Beata Nowicka and the entire Chodkiewicz & Partners team, it appears that most conflicts in logistics consortiums stem from a lack of clear problem escalation procedures. In this case, it would have been enough if one person from the terminal operator's side had the authority to manually correct errors in the notification system in real-time. During the summary session in April, we proposed introducing short, 15-minute online check-ins every Tuesday at 9:00. Since then, the number of disputed invoices in this project has dropped from 23% to just 4% per month.
It is also worth remembering that mediation is not a sign of weakness. It is a pragmatic financial tool. If in your project many parties have conflicting interests, it is worth inviting someone from the outside before words are said that cannot be taken back. We, as Chodkiewicz & Partners, have been doing this daily since 2016. We do not use universal templates because every dispute in logistics has its own specificity. Sometimes the problem is a server, sometimes a poorly constructed contract appendix, and sometimes just the fatigue of drivers and dispatchers that turns into verbal aggression.
