LCM Alert Validation

Phase 2 Pilot
No Defect Detected
55%
Confidence
Failure Category
No Fault Found
Subcategory
No Fault Found
Approved by Kevin Eisentrout

Work Order Details

Asset ID
V565497
Site
ORD5
Vendor
TA
Circuit
RED (Brake)
Date Actioned
2026-05-07T16:47:57.203000+00:00
Week
19
amz-id
0404143055
Relay Garage

AI Deep Dive Analysis

Sensor Verdict: The LCM sensor issued an alert on the RED (Brake) circuit for trailer V565497 at site ORD5. Based on the vendor's findings, no active defect was confirmed on the alerting circuit or any other circuit. Confidence in this 'No Defect Detected' outcome is moderate (55%) rather than high, primarily because documentation quality is insufficient to fully exonerate the sensor — the absence of confirmed photo evidence and minimal specificity in the technician's notes leave some ambiguity about whether a transient or intermittent fault (e.g., a loose terminal that was re-tightened) may have actually caused the original alert.
Photo Evidence: No photos are confirmed as attached to this work order record. The technician's notes claim that 'pictures of each function working properly' were taken, but those images are not present in the data provided for review. There is no nosebox wiring photo, no TechAssist app screenshot showing green 'Verified' status beside each of the 5 circuits, and no images of individual illuminated lights. This is a significant documentation gap. The claim of PCT TechAssist verification cannot be independently validated without the required screenshot, and the stated photo evidence of functioning lights cannot be assessed. This alone represents a failure to meet the minimum documentation standard set by the LCM troubleshooting procedure.
Vendor Compliance: The vendor partially followed the LCM troubleshooting procedure. They referenced use of the Phillips Connect PCT TechAssist app and stated that all circuits were verified as working. However, they did not provide the required TechAssist app completion screenshot showing green 'Verified' status for each of the 5 circuits, did not submit photos of each light illuminated, and did not include a clear nosebox wiring photo. The technician also noted terminal tightening during inspection, which is a subtle but potentially meaningful finding — loose terminals are a known cause of intermittent LCM faults and may have been the root cause of the original alert. This was not explicitly called out in the feedback category as required (e.g., 'wiring installed incorrectly' or 'no defect found (confirmed with PCT)'). Overall, vendor compliance with the prescribed troubleshooting workflow is incomplete.
Repair Summary: No lighting components were replaced. The only billable labor involves a PCT sensor activation line item (categorized under tire pressure/speed sensor, likely a miscategorization or administrative artifact of the LCM pilot program), a standard service labor charge, and lot service hourly labor totaling approximately $188 in charges. Terminal tightening was performed but not captured as a discrete repair line item. No parts associated with the RED (Brake) circuit — such as brake/tail lamps, wiring harness components, or nosebox inserts — were replaced. Since no parts were replaced, compliant brand assessment is not applicable.
Key Concerns: Several flags warrant attention. First, the line item categorization is unusual — the PCT sensor activation is filed under tire pressure/speed sensor taxonomy, which is likely a system limitation or vendor error but creates traceability issues. Second, the terminal tightening noted by the technician is potentially significant: if loose terminals were present at the nosebox or along the circuit, this could represent the actual root cause of the LCM alert and should have been documented as 'wiring damage' or a related defect subcategory rather than treated as a no-fault-found scenario. Third, the complete absence of photo documentation despite the technician claiming photos were taken raises questions about whether the work was completed to the required standard or whether photos were taken but not uploaded. Fleet reviewers should request photo evidence directly from TA before closing this work order as fully compliant, and should consider whether the terminal tightening warrants reclassification of this event as a confirmed (if minor) wiring defect.

LCM Current Readings — All Circuits

RED (Brake) ALERTING
GREEN (Right Turn)
YELLOW (Left Turn)
BROWN (Marker)
BLACK (Clearance / License Plate)

Vendor WO Notes

override for LCM pilot --- Yard Location Update: DockDoor - DD110 --- MAG TA --- Yard Location Update: ParkingSlip - PS585 --- ESTIMATE COMPLETE TA COMPLAINT LCMPILOT CORRECTION VERIFIED ALL CIRCUITS AND LIGHTS AND FUNCTIONS WORKING PROPERLY CHECKED ALL TERMINALS AND TIGHTEN ALL TERMINALS CHECK 7WAY AND DID NOT FIND ANY BROKEN OR SPLICED WIRES CHECKED VOLTAGE FOR EACH TERMINAL PERFORMED LIGHT CHECK AND FOUND ALL LIGHTS AND FUNCTIONS WORKING PROPERLY AND TOOK PICTURES OF EACH FUNCTION WORKING PROPERLY ALL LIGHTS ARE WORKING AND BRIGHT ALL CIRCUITS VERIFIED IN PCT TECH APP THANK YOU MA 5 FOR C A --- COMPLETE MA TA --- pv --- COMPLETE TA

Defect Photos

TC_07704.jpeg TC_07718.jpeg TC_07702.jpeg TC_07705.jpeg TC_07716.jpeg TC_07714.jpeg TC_07712.jpeg TC_07711.jpeg TC_07706.jpeg IMG_1703.png TC_07719.jpeg IMG_1719.png TC_07708.jpeg TC_07709.jpeg TC_07715.jpeg TC_07713.jpeg TC_07703.jpeg TC_07710.jpeg TC_07707.jpeg IMG_1718.png

LLM Classification (Editable)

Reviewer Input

Approved by Kevin Eisentrout on 2026-05-16T11:04:23.901823

← Back to Deep Dive