LCM Alert Validation

Confidence

Failure Category

Lighting

Subcategory

Lighting - Failed Light

Sensor Verdict: The LCM sensor alert on the BLACK (Clearance / License Plate) circuit is assessed as 'Defect Detected' with 82% confidence. The technician's own description of replacing a 'top rear dim light' is directly corroborative — a dim or degraded LED clearance lamp is one of the most common triggers for a BLACK circuit LCM alert, as the sensor monitors voltage and current draw that would deviate from expected values when an LED begins to fail or a pigtail connection degrades. The combination of a failed LED marker lamp and a faulty pigtail strongly supports that the sensor correctly identified a real, physical defect rather than a nuisance alert.

Photo Evidence: No photos were attached to this work order. The LCM troubleshooting procedure explicitly requires photos of each light illuminated and a clear image of the nosebox wiring, as well as a TechAssist app completion screenshot showing green 'Verified' status beside each of the 5 circuits. None of these documentation requirements were met. While the technician states circuits were verified through the app, the absence of any visual evidence means the repair outcome cannot be independently validated. This is a significant documentation gap that undermines the work order's completeness.

Vendor Compliance: The vendor (TA) partially complied with the LCM troubleshooting procedure. On the positive side, the technician references using the PCT TechAssist app and confirms circuits were verified post-repair. However, compliance is incomplete: no photos of illuminated lights were provided, no nosebox photo was included, and no TechAssist app completion screenshot was attached. The technician's notes are brief and do not map to any of the formally defined feedback categories (e.g., 'light dim,' 'light failure'), though the narrative ('top rear dim light') clearly implies a 'light dim' or 'light failure' scenario. The procedural shortcut on documentation is a vendor compliance concern.

Repair Summary: The repair addressed the BLACK circuit directly. Parts replaced include one mini LED red marker lamp (33250R, $23.99), two butt splice connectors (Seal-A-Crimp 16-14), and a light pigtail — all consistent with resolving a dim or failed clearance/marker lamp with a compromised wiring connection. Labor line items cover R&R of one marker/clearance light and the pigtail replacement, totaling approximately 0.75 hours of electrical labor plus 0.5 hours of lot service. The PCT sensor activation line item suggests SmartFlow/TPMS sensor activation was also performed, though this appears incidental to the lighting repair. The LED lamp replaced appears to be a standard aftermarket unit; no Grote or OEM-equivalent brand specification is confirmed from the part number alone.

Key Concerns: Two primary concerns are flagged. First, the complete absence of photos and TechAssist app screenshots is a meaningful documentation failure — the procedure was explicitly designed to require these, and without them there is no independent verification that all five circuits were checked or that the correct lamp position was addressed. Second, the inclusion of a TPMS/speed sensor activation line item on a lighting work order is unusual and may indicate scope creep or bundling of unrelated services onto this WO. Neither of these concerns invalidates the core finding that the sensor correctly identified a defect, but they do reflect vendor non-compliance with the prescribed troubleshooting protocol and should be flagged for vendor scorecard purposes.