DC68G Harvester
The one claim in the pilot that was not paid in full
A rubber crawler on a DC68G harvester, cut during field operation. Claimed $1,172 and approved $1,076 — 91.8%. This is the only claim of the five that came back at less than the full amount, which is exactly why it has its own page.
The record
What was claimed and what came back
- Claimed
- $1,172
- Approved
- $1,076
- Recovery
- 91.8%
- Status
- Approved
Amounts shown in US dollars, converted from the dealership’s original warranty records in Indian Rupees at approximately ₹83 = US$1. Recovery is approved value as a share of claimed value. Claim numbers are shown partially redacted.
What this is and isn’t. This is our own dealership, not a client, and these are Indian Kubota claims — not US, UK, or Canadian OEM claims. Five claims is a small sample and we’re not going to present it as more than it is. We publish it because it’s the claim data we own outright and because it shows the work we actually do. We don’t have North American references yet. You’d be among the first, and we’d price it that way.
The failure
What came into the shop
DC68G Harvester — Rubber crawler cut in field operation.
A rubber crawler cut in the field is a failure that sits right on the line between a warranty matter and a wear-and-tear matter, and both the dealer and the manufacturer know it. Crawlers are a consumable in the sense that they wear out; they are not a consumable in the sense that a manufacturing defect cannot cause one to fail early.
That is the argument the claim has to survive. Not "did this part fail" — everyone can see that it did — but "is this failure the manufacturer’s to pay for, or the operating conditions’".
Why it is awkward on paper
The part that is not mechanical
Claims on parts that also wear out are where dealers most often decide in advance not to bother. The reasoning is understandable and usually wrong: a claim that comes back at 92% still returned most of the money, and a claim that is never written returns none of it.
The outcome
What happened when it was submitted
Approved at 91.8% of claimed value rather than in full. We publish the shortfall rather than the average, because a warranty administrator who only shows you the claims that cleared at 100% is showing you a selection rather than a record. Four of five paid in full; this one did not.
Every claim in this record was prepared the same way, and the method is published in full — complete evidence packs, part and defect codes mapped to the failure, rates checked against the live schedule before submission, and the claim followed through to credit rather than to submission.
The other four claims
- MU5502 engine rebuild warranty claim
$2,157 claimed · 100% recovered
- L4508 gear case cover and transmission set warranty claim
$1,119 claimed · 100% recovered
- L4508 gear case cover and bevel gear assembly warranty claim
$731 claimed · 100% recovered
- L4508 muffler damage warranty claim
$123 claimed · 100% recovered
Next step
Your claims, not ours
This is our own dealership. What it tells you is how we work, not what we will recover for you — and the only honest way to find that out is to look at your claims. Bring a month of repair orders and your last few denials, and you will get a straight answer about what is recoverable, whether or not you hire us.