Can You Dispute D&D Charges From Your Freight Forwarder?

When demurrage and detention (D&D) arrives on a freight forwarder’s invoice, your team may need records from several systems to understand why the charges accrued. Peloton’s US$33.7 million claim against Flexport illustrates the difficulty. In an initial decision served on 9 September 2026, an FMC judge found Flexport not liable for reparations.

The judge found that Peloton’s evidence did not adequately connect individual charges to the events and alleged unreasonable practices behind them. Its damages analysis relied heavily on consolidated invoices covering multiple containers. For importers buying transportation through an NVOCC, the practical lesson is to retain enough supporting information to check each disputed charge, including records that may otherwise remain in the provider’s systems.

What happened in Peloton v. Flexport?

In FMC Docket No. 24-19, Administrative Law Judge Mary Apostolakos Hervey found that Flexport, acting as a non-vessel-operating common carrier (NVOCC), did not violate the Shipping Act provisions Peloton cited. Peloton had challenged charges associated with chassis shortages, port congestion and inland transportation delays during the pandemic-era disruption. The initial decision rejected its claims; that outcome should not be treated as blanket approval of D&D on every forwarder-managed shipment.

Item	What the record shows
Parties	Peloton Interactive (consignee) v. Flexport International (NVOCC)
Scale	More than 7,000 shipments during 2020–2023, according to Seatrade Maritime’s reporting
Amount claimed	US$33.7m: US$13.8m demurrage, US$16.2m equipment detention, US$3.7m yard and warehouse storage
Standard applied	The judge required evidence connecting disputed charges to events involving particular containers and charged days
Why the damages case failed	The judge found that the expert analysis did not sufficiently connect individual charges to the events and alleged unreasonable conduct underlying them
Store-door argument	Store-door terms alone do not prohibit D&D; governing terms and the circumstances of each charge matter
Delays traced to Peloton	Limited warehouse space, late unloading, containers not ready when truckers arrived
OSRA 2022 invoice claim	13 invoices totalling US$83,390 alleged to be missing required information; rejected because the invoices and the defects were not sufficiently identified
Status	Initial decision; the exceptions deadline was extended to 9 November 2026

Sources: FMC Docket No. 24-19 and reporting by gCaptain, Splash247 and Seatrade Maritime. Procedural status reflects the FMC’s 24 September 2026 notice. Dollar amounts are rounded; shipment and container counts are different measures.

The need for shipment-specific evidence also featured in Samsung’s cases against ZIM and SM Line, discussed in our review of the documentation issues in Samsung’s FMC disputes. Peloton illustrates how similar evidence problems can arise when the billing party is an NVOCC.

Can you dispute demurrage charged by your freight forwarder?

Yes. When a forwarder acts as an NVOCC and issues a covered D&D invoice, 46 CFR Part 541 sets invoice-content and billing requirements. These rules also cover ocean common carriers and marine terminal operators, although they exclude billing relationships among and between ocean common carriers and marine terminal operators.

The billing party must allow at least 30 calendar days from invoice issuance to request mitigation, refund or waiver. Under §541.5, missing required information removes the obligation to pay the applicable charge on a defective invoice. However, the billing party may issue a compliant correction within the applicable invoicing deadline; the defect does not necessarily extinguish the charge permanently, and the rule grants no extra correction time.

Two NVOCC-specific provisions matter when there is an underlying D&D invoice:

§541.7(b): an NVOCC must issue its D&D invoice to you within 30 calendar days of the issuance date of the D&D invoice it received from its own billing party, usually the carrier. If it does not, you are not required to pay the charge.
§541.7(c): when an NVOCC is both a billing and billed party for the same charge, it can notify its own billing party that its customer has disputed the charge. That billing party must then give the NVOCC an additional 30 calendar days to dispute it.

Check the basis of the invoice before assuming it is a carrier charge passed through unchanged. The Peloton decision records that Flexport applied its own D&D rates under its tariffs and contractual arrangements. Peloton did not receive invoices directly from Flexport’s service providers.

Raise disputes promptly so the NVOCC can use the available upstream process where applicable. Missing a billing party’s dispute window does not, by itself, prevent an FMC complaint, and paying an invoice does not automatically waive the right to challenge it. The available procedure and filing deadline depend on the claim.

Part 541 took full effect on 28 May 2024. Its requirements should not be applied retroactively to Peloton’s earlier invoices, but they provide a useful checklist for invoices issued under today’s rules.

The legal basis of a dispute also matters. For a qualifying Charge Complaint under 46 U.S.C. §41310, the common carrier bears the burden of establishing D&D reasonableness. The FMC’s September 2026 clarification confirms that this applies through traditional complaint procedures as well. Identifying the charge and supplying relevant evidence remains important, but a shipper does not always have to prove that the carrier caused the original delay.

Where a forwarder-billed D&D dispute breaks down

Some critical records may sit with the forwarder

In its public response to Flexport’s proposed findings of fact, Peloton said it did not ordinarily retain certain operational records, including empty-container notification information, and relied on Flexport’s systems. Peloton also disputed whether it had received complete Warehouse App data. These were Peloton’s arguments about particular records, rather than a finding that it held no shipment information.

The same filing acknowledged that Peloton’s ERP held information about shipment creation, milestones and warehouse receipt. The practical issue was whether the available material could establish the relevant events for the charges in dispute. For your own shipments, retain accessible copies of provider records alongside receiving records, emails and terminal notices.

An invoice total does not explain individual charges

A D&D invoice can cover several containers: §541.6 expressly accommodates multiple container and bill-of-lading numbers. Consolidation alone does not make an invoice defective. In Peloton’s case, however, the judge found that the analysis relying on consolidated invoices lacked enough detail to establish why individual charges were unreasonable.

A total does not establish what happened on day nine for a particular container. Depending on the dispute, useful evidence may show when the container was available, whether a pickup or return was possible, and what happened at the receiving facility. Match those events to the dates billed. A tracking timestamp can establish a movement; the emails, appointment records or terminal notices around it may explain the delay.

If your D&D arrives on a forwarder’s invoice and the only container dates you hold are the ones printed on it, see how import teams track container events from discharge to empty return.

Paying first and auditing later

The decision found that Peloton audited Flexport’s invoices after paying them, did not file a formal claim with Flexport disputing the charges, and did not provide a list of the shipments and invoices it disputed. Peloton explained in its filings that it paid to maintain credit availability and keep cargo moving, expecting to audit and dispute later. The operational lesson is to identify and preserve the grounds for a dispute as early as possible, even when payment comes first.

Peloton also alleged that 13 invoices worth US$83,390 lacked information required under OSRA 2022. That claim was rejected because the invoices and alleged violations were not sufficiently identified and supported. When raising an invoice-content issue, identify the invoice number and the specific missing or inaccurate information.

Your own records will show your own delays

The record showed Peloton contributed to some delays through limited warehouse space, late unloading and containers that were not ready when truckers arrived. The judge also declined to treat a store-door booking as making the forwarder responsible by default. Recording your own receiving constraints helps distinguish them from other restrictions and supports a more precise assessment of each charge. The contractual issues are explored in who pays demurrage on a store-door shipment.

What container-level records does a D&D dispute need?

For a dispute about delay or cargo availability, build a timeline for each affected container and compare it with the dates charged. Invoice-content and billing-deadline disputes may require different evidence. The table below combines selected mandatory invoice fields with operational records that can help explain what happened.

Field or record	Why it matters in a dispute	Potential source
Container number and B/L	Connects charges to the relevant container and shipment; required under §541.6(a)	Invoice, bill of lading and booking records
Availability date	Required for imports under §541.6(b)(6); compare it with evidence of actual access restrictions	Invoice, carrier or terminal records
Free time allowance, start and end	Required under §541.6(b)(3)–(5); helps check when charges should begin under the applicable terms	Invoice, tariff or contractual arrangement
Gate-out and trucker	Shows when the container left and who collected it	Terminal event, interchange receipt and drayage records
Delivery and unloading completion	Helps distinguish transit time from time at the receiving facility	Proof of delivery and receiving or warehouse records
Empty notification	Shows when the forwarder or trucker was told the container was ready for collection	Emails, portal messages and warehouse records
Empty return acceptance	Establishes the return date for checking import detention against the applicable terms	Terminal or depot event and interchange receipt
Dates charged	Identifies the days billed; required under §541.6(b)(8)	D&D invoice and supporting breakdown
Events and restrictions during charged days	Helps assess whether the charge was reasonable and who could act during the period	Appointment records, closure notices, emails, operational logs and contemporaneous notes

Selected required invoice fields under 46 CFR 541.6, plus additional operational evidence. This is not a complete invoice-compliance checklist. Record availability varies by provider and contractual arrangement.

Other required invoice information includes the applicable rule and rates, dispute instructions and certifications addressing FMC compliance and whether the billing party’s performance caused or contributed to the charges. Operational milestones are explained in container tracking milestones. For invoice checks, see demurrage billing errors: free time, gate-out and availability.

Is the Peloton v. Flexport decision final?

It was issued as an initial decision and remains subject to the review process. A notice served on 24 September 2026 extended the deadline for exceptions to 9 November 2026. It also extended the time for the Commission to determine whether to review the decision to 17 November 2026.

Separately, an April 2026 scheduling notice extended the final-decision deadline to 29 March 2027, superseding the earlier November 2026 deadline. These are different procedural dates, not a promise that a final ruling will arrive on a particular day. If the Commission does not review the initial decision, it becomes the Commission’s decision under the applicable procedure.

What to do before your next forwarder D&D invoice

If an invoice covers several containers, obtain a breakdown that connects each charge to the container, free time and specific dates billed.
Establish whether the NVOCC is applying its own rates or billing a charge received from another party. Where §541.7(b) applies, check its invoice date against the issuance date of the underlying D&D invoice.
Dispute in writing within the stated window, which must allow at least 30 calendar days from issuance under §541.8. Identify the invoices and charges, and explain the grounds for the dispute.
Where the NVOCC is both billing and billed for the same charge, notify it promptly so it can seek the additional upstream dispute time under §541.7(c).
Retain accessible copies of gate-out, delivery, unloading, empty-notification and return records, including their source and any later corrections.
Record your own receiving constraints alongside failed pickup attempts, return restrictions and other relevant events.
For charges already paid, review how far back you can challenge demurrage charges, then work through the practical guide to challenging US D&D invoices.

Frequently asked questions

Can a forwarder charge demurrage on a store-door shipment?

Potentially. Store-door terms alone do not prohibit D&D. For a forwarder acting as an NVOCC, the governing terms, billing requirements and circumstances of each charge matter.

Do the FMC’s D&D invoice rules apply to NVOCCs?

Yes. Covered NVOCC D&D invoices are subject to 46 CFR Part 541, including its invoice-content requirements. Sections 541.7(b) and (c) address NVOCC billing and upstream dispute timing.

Is a consolidated invoice enough evidence for a D&D claim?

It depends on the grounds of the claim and the supporting information. An invoice may cover multiple containers, but an aggregate total alone does not establish why individual charges were unreasonable.

How long do I have to dispute a D&D invoice?

Under 46 CFR 541.8, the billing party must allow at least 30 calendar days from invoice issuance to request mitigation, refund or waiver. It must attempt resolution within 30 calendar days of receiving the request, or a later date agreed by both parties. Missing that billing-party window does not itself bar an FMC complaint.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

New Report: The Future of SCM, and Why Visibility Alone Is No Longer Enough

[TRADLINX Report] 2026 Shipping Market Outlook: Falling Rates, Rising Risks