Warranty Retail-Rate & Chargeback-Defence AI Agent

What this agent does

Assembles the run, not the certification on it

A repair order closes, and its labour hours, parts cost and pay type are carried onto the qualifying run.

A repair order carries an oil change beside a real repair, and it is tested on what was done, not on op code.

Reason

A run is assembled, and the starting repair order, the sequence and each statutory exclusion sit against it.

A Florida run opens under Fla. Stat. §320.696, where the manufacturer, not the dealer, picks the starting order.

A submission is transmitted, and the receipt date is captured, because the deemed-approval date runs from it.

Decide

A response window closes, and the filing is marked approved by operation of law where the statute says so.

An audit opens, and each line in the auditor's sample is read against that state's audit window first.

Out

A chargeback lands, and the repair order, the statute it was selected under and the certification stay on file.

Execute write actions only inside the approval boundaries agreed during implementation.

→ Product statement

This is not per-claim triage: the agent assembles the rate submission and the post-audit defence, and the fixed-operations director certifies both.

Example workflow

One submission, run to certification

AgentHuman

1Repair orders receivedDMS repair-order export, parts invoice or accounting extract

2Sample assembledLabour hours, parts cost, pay type and close date, each with its named source

3Rate proposedEffective labour rate, parts markup, clock dates and confidence

4Controls appliedQualifying tests, sequence integrity, lookback and audit windows, and confidence threshold

No human action required

Stages 1 to 4 run unaided, and nothing is submitted at any of them — the agent is assembling, and the director's lane opens at the confidence gate.

5DecisionBranches at the confidence threshold

High confidence

Goes to the fixed-operations director.

Low confidence

Adds a franchise-counsel read first.

Director approval

The submission is held with its repair orders, its exclusions and the confidence.

Approve · Amend · Send to counsel review

Approved — released to certify▼

6Warranty systems updatedOnly where write access and approval policy allow it

7Outcome evaluatedAmendment rate, exclusion disputes, deemed-approval dates and chargeback outcomes

Amendments

Every director amendment is counted in the evaluation.

What should not run autonomously

Human approval stays in control

Outside the boundary — human approval required8 items

Certifying the retail-rate submission to the manufacturer.

Deciding that a contested repair order stays in the run.

Conceding a chargeback or agreeing an extrapolation.

Choosing when, and in which state, to re-declare a rate.

Automation boundaryAgent acts unaided

✓Assemble the qualifying run from closed repair orders.

✓Carry each inclusion or exclusion with the rule behind it for the named owner.

✓Compute the rate and markup, and run the response clock.

✓Flag the orders the director should weigh, and hold the run for them.

Any write happens inside the boundaries agreed at implementation, never ahead of certification.

Signing the dealer's response to an audit finding.

Settling a chargeback inside the manufacturer's portal.

Waiving a statutory meeting or response window.

Changes to qualifying, clock or certification rules.

Example output

One repair order, annotated

Everything the agent assembles is attached to the repair order it was drawn from.

Qualifying output · single repair orderIllustrative example

Repair order

Description

Closed

Proposed status

Confidence

Qualifying rule

Customer-pay RO

Front strut replacement, customer-paid, two labour lines

9 May 2026

In the qualifying run

93%

Nonwarranty repair, not

As receivedTaken from the DMS repair order and the parts invoice — nothing on this side is inferred.

Evidence used Closed repair order Parts invoice line Labour-op record

Why this statusA customer-paid nonwarranty repair, so the maintenance exclusion does not reach it.

ActionApproveAmendSend to counsel review

What the score decidesBelow the configured threshold the run picks up a counsel read before the director.

Value

Where AI adds value

The same four claims, placed at the point in the workflow where each one applies.

Where the value landsValue 01 – 04

Every repair orderFrom the DMS

03Qualifying

Assemble against your state

Draw on the closed repair orders on file and the statute in force in that state on the submission date.

01Approved path

Silence can mean approved

Routine orders arrive already tested, with the rate and the markup computed.

02Human review

Send review to the contested lines

Excluded orders and low-confidence tests are marked first, because manufacturers carrying record warranty cost audit harder.

04Build an evidence trail

The repair order, the statute it was selected under and the manager who certified stay on the submission.

Integrations

Typical integrations

Five system groups connect to the same agent. Which of them are in scope is decided in discovery.

Dealer management systemsCDK Global · Reynolds
Tekion · Dealertrack · PBS

Warranty systemsOEM warranty portals
Claim-submission platforms

Parts and accountingParts inventory · invoices
General ledger · schedules

Agent

Warranty rate and chargeback

Reads the order
Assembles the run
Holds for certification

Documents and auditDocument imaging · DMS
Audit portals · schedules

Observability & evaluationOpenTelemetry · Langfuse
Supported monitoring/evaluation sources

Integration availability depends on the client's existing systems and API access.

Agent controls

Six layers between the model and the submission

The controls narrow inward through six stages. What emerges uncaught is set out in the map below.

L6 · Outermost — last line of defenceInward → L1 · closest to the model

L6Rollback / safe modePull the agent back to submission tracking when evaluation or production signals degrade.Roll back

L5Version monitoringTrack model, prompt, qualifying-rule and clock-configuration changes.Track

L4TraceabilityRecord the repair orders, the run, the exclusions, the amendments and the certification.Record

L3Director approvalHold runs for the named director; it governs release, not whether the certification is true.Gate

L2Policy guardrailsTest runs against the configured state rules; a broken sequence returns the submission.Restrict

L1Confidence thresholdsRoute low-confidence runs to a counsel read before the director sees them.Require review

Model coreRun assembled — effective rate, parts markup, clock dates and confidence

L1 – L2Test whether a run may stand

L3Puts the release in a director's hands

L4 – L5Keep the repair order and the statute behind it

L6Falls back to submission tracking when signals degrade

How Nestack evaluates it

Evaluate the submission workflow — not only the rate at the end.

Coverage runs the whole depth of the workflow, and every layer is cut by slice.

Surface — the rate the manufacturer sees

Depth of coverage ▼

E1Final-output evaluationDid each repair order in the run pass that state's qualifying test?

E2Step-level evaluationDid the agent use the right orders, statute version and lookback window?

E3Tool evaluationDid it read and write the correct repair order and the correct field?

E4Confidence calibrationDo low-confidence runs actually attract more director amendments?

E5Slice evaluationHow does performance change across specific franchise groups?

E6Business outcomeHow many submissions needed an amendment, or a defence after audit?

Floor — the money the dealer answers for

Failure modes

Where each failure originates in the agent

Seven failure modes, placed at the stage each one originates.

Agent lifecycleDirection of processing →

01 · Retrieval1 mode

WR-03

Wrong pay-type filter

Internal and warranty lines pulled in as customer-pay.

Stage gathersRepair orders, parts invoices, statutes and clocks

02 · Reasoning2 modes

WR-04

National sample rule

A Florida run built on the dealer-selected model.

WR-06

Exclusion by op code

A whole multi-line order dropped for one maintenance line.

Stage proposesEffective rate, markup, clock dates and confidence

03 · Tool / write2 modes

WR-02

Silence read as refusal

A run clock lapses and the filing is abandoned.

WR-05

Rate re-declared twice

A second filing lands where the state allows one.

Stage writesOnly where write access and approval policy allow it

04 · Output1 mode

WR-01

Reconstruction mismatch

Audit file rebuilt from current DMS state, not the record.

Stage returnsThe submission and defence the manufacturer receives

05 · Change / Version1 mode

WR-07

Silent rule regression

A model or rule change widens what counts as qualifying.

Stage tracksModel, prompt, qualifying rules and clock config

Sev-1 · acts outside the filing boundary Sev-2 · a bad order reaches the submission Sev-3 · source degrades, run routes to review

See the complete Automotive failure-mode catalogue →

Affected slices

One franchise can carry the exposure

A blended approved rate across the group hides the franchises that absorb the amendments and the chargebacks — and no public dealer-side chargeback rate exists to benchmark against. Nestack reports by slice, not in total.

Slice performance — reported separately, not only in aggregateIllustrative example

Slice	Failure rate	Lift	Status
Multi-line repair orders	6.6%	3.6×	Review
Manufacturer-selected samples	4.4%	2.4×	Review
Parts-markup runs	3.1%	1.7×	Watch
Single-line customer-pay orders	1.6%	0.9×	Normal

Bar: amendment-rate lift vs. single-line-order baseline · scale 0–4.0× · tick marks the 2.0× review threshold 2 of 4 slices over threshold

Evidence-linked improvement

Every cycle ends by adding a case

A cycle ends when the abandoned submission is a case the next release has to catch. That suite is what the next rate filed is measured against.

Improvement cycle · five stagesSwitchback — the path turns at Improve and returns at Learn

01Detect

Amendment rate rises in a franchise slice.

02Diagnose

The rate filing that was abandoned on day thirty-one is read back to a single cause.

03Improve

Number the correction, and keep the submissions that surfaced it fastened to it.

04Verify

The touched cases go round once more, and one failure keeps the release where it is.

05Learn

It becomes a fixture of the suite, and the state rules follow it.

Learn → DetectThe return edge. The next rate is filed against a suite one case longer.

Typical build scope

Twelve workstreams across six weeks

The build scope read against the delivery timeline. Week structure follows the six-week plan — discovery, sources, submission workflow, evaluation, integration, then production validation and handover.

Workstream Week 1Week 2Week 3Week 4Week 5Week 6

01Warranty workflow discovery and boundary definition.

02DMS and warranty-portal assessment.

03Qualifying, clock and certification rule mapping.

04Repair-order ingestion and normalisation.

05Run assembly and source binding.

06Confidence scoring and exclusion routing.

07Fixed-operations director approval.

08DMS and warranty-system integration.

09Qualifying and clock cases.

10Guardrails and certification controls.

11Order-trail instrumentation.

12Deployment, documentation and Agent Care handover.

12 workstreams · 6 weeks · bar shows the weeks a workstream is active — several run in parallel Final scope and sequence confirmed in discovery

Engagement tiers

What each tier includes

Rows are the capabilities named in each tier's scope. Higher tiers include everything below them.

Capability✓ in scope · — not at this tier PilotOne franchise, one state ProductionProduction warranty systems AdvancedMultiple franchises / states

Introduced at Pilot

Assembly to your orders and rules✓✓✓

Director approval✓✓✓

Qualifying-selection baseline✓✓✓

Introduced at Production

Reporting by franchise—✓✓

Approval workflow in your systems—✓✓

Approved write-back—✓✓

DMS repair-order integration—✓✓

Introduced at Advanced

Multiple state regimes and clocks——✓

Multi-stage dealer approvals——✓

High repair-order volume——✓

Multi-franchise rate controls——✓

Build price From $5,000 From $8,000 Custom quote

Final build priceConfirmed after discovery based on integrations, workflow complexity, transaction volume, approval controls and deployment requirements.

Separate from buildBuild pricing is separate from recurring Agent Care, which covers managed monitoring, evaluations, incidents and verified improvements after launch.

What we need from you

What you bring, and what we build with it

Each input maps to a piece of build scope and a week in the delivery timeline.

You bringWe build with it

01Your repair-order and parts data → Repair-order ingestion and evidence mappingWeek 1

02Representative submissions already filed → Qualifying baseline and source bindingWeek 2

03Your state rules and submission clocks → Qualifying, clock and certification rule mappingWeek 1

04Access to relevant APIs, feeds or exports → DMS and warranty-portal assessment, then integration setupWeek 2

05Submissions you would not want certified → Chargeback cases and the evaluation suiteWeek 4

06What no submission may include → Confidence scoring, exclusion routing, guardrails and certification controlsWeek 3

07A named fixed-operations director to approve → Director approval workflow, then pilot and production validationWeeks 5–6

Nothing else is required Deployment, documentation and Agent Care handover are ours.

Delivery timeline

Four phases across six weeks

The weeks are drawn from the submission calendar, so the fifth carries evaluation and the pilot.

Phase W1W2W3W4W5W6

Discovery W1

Build W2 – W3

Evaluate W4 – W5

Pilot & Launch W5 – W6

Week focus W1Warranty workflow discovery, rule mapping and the automation boundary W2DMS integration and the qualifying baseline W3Submission workflow, confidence logic and approval controls W4Evaluation suite, qualifying and clock checks and failure-mode testing W5Warranty-portal integration, pilot submissions and targeted corrections W6One submission cycle run under the service director, then Agent Care handover

Reading the bandEach band covers only the weeks its work is named in. The week 5 overlap is real, not padding.

At the end of W6Validation closes on live submissions, and Agent Care takes over monitoring.

DurationSix-week plan shown · typical delivery 4–6 weeks depending on scope confirmed in discovery.

Next step · Automotive AI agent

Build a warranty rate and chargeback agent around your submission calendar.

New Hampshire's RSA 357-C:5 and Minnesota's §80E.041 subd. 2(c) both say a declared rate drawing no timely disapproval takes effect. Bring us one abandoned submission and the director who would certify the next.

Discuss this agent →

Nestack Agents · Warranty rate & chargebackAGT-AUT-14 · Agent Care available after launch