Before delivery, a vehicle may be the subject of three conflicting accounts: pre-shipment records show normal condition, on-site staff raise cooling or brake concerns, and the document list does not identify which vehicle the observation concerns. At this point, clarify the question each record answers. For Bolivian importers and after-sales leads, PDI should organize handover evidence, not merely serve as a checklist.
The Bolivia IBMETRO vehicle inspection page can be used to check inspection and certificate procedures, with applicability to specific vehicles still confirmed under current rules. The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe vehicle regulations provide public access to the vehicle technical regulatory framework, not evidence that Bolivia has approved a specific model or version. Inspection procedures, technical information and pre-delivery condition records should be held separately, with their purposes explained individually.
How to separate a set of conflicting records
PDI disputes usually arise from mixing materials. Pre-transit images answer what was visible at that time; post-arrival checklists answer what was observed at receipt; workshop explanations answer which checks or actions were performed; and official-procedure documents answer what needs checking under current requirements. Their times, vehicle identities and responsible people differ, so they cannot replace one another.
Cooling and brake records particularly need clear observation conditions. Recorders can describe visible condition, dashboard alerts, test assignments, braking-feel feedback or whether action occurred, but should not state undiagnosed causes as facts. For an abnormality, preserve original images, VIN, date, location, inspector and subsequent service-order number together. Later reviewers can then see whether any leap occurred between observation and conclusion.
The question each document answers
| Document | Specific question it answers | Information that must be linked | Conclusion it should not support |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pre-shipment condition images | What was visibly apparent on this vehicle before shipment | VIN, shooting date, angle | Cause of condition after arrival |
| Arrival PDI form | What was found at receipt | VIN, inspector, items and time | Whether inspection procedures have been satisfied |
| Cooling or brake inspection explanation | Which phenomenon was checked and how | Task context, bay records, person handling it | Future road performance |
| Inspection and certificate pending-check list | Which official matters remain to be confirmed | Vehicle information, source of current requirements | Recognition of the model |
The limits on what the table's records "cannot support" are equally important. Someone seeing only one pre-shipment photo cannot use it to dismiss an arrival inspection; someone seeing only an inspection form cannot skip VIN matching and attribute the problem to a particular vehicle. Keeping answers within each document's original scope makes delivery disputes easier to resolve.
Arrange the PDI sequence starting with VIN
Confirm vehicle identity before delivery. Put the body VIN, accompanying information, shipping list, PDI form and image numbers in the same receiving pack, with the recipient confirming their correspondence. Then move to visible condition, functional checks, exception recording and response arrangements. If information cannot be matched, mark it pending first to avoid mixing another vehicle's records into the current file.
When checking the cooling and brake condition of a Deepal S05, technicians should record operating conditions, phenomena and reinspection results using the manual applicable to this vehicle. The model page provides no inspection conclusion for Bolivia's high-altitude conditions and cannot replace import or delivery acceptance checks.
Recording language for high-altitude projects
Cooling and brake inspection wording should preserve the limits of observation. For example, "an alert was recorded after a specified task" better suits a pending-diagnosis stage than "the system has a particular fault"; "a check was completed with bay records attached" better fits handover documents than "the problem is resolved." The former supports later investigation, while the latter can create unnecessary liability disputes if unsupported.
Route assignments and vehicle condition should also be separated. The assignment explains the operating context during testing or transfer; PDI explains condition at receipt; maintenance records explain actions taken. Combining all three into "the vehicle suits high altitude" exceeds the evidentiary scope of pre-delivery records.
Handover actions after an exception
When cooling- or brake-related phenomena require verification, it is advisable to move the vehicle from the normal delivery queue to "pending review," recording the reason for the restriction, next handler, missing materials and review completion conditions. Whether to continue shipment, hand over to the customer or carry out repairs should be decided jointly by contractual arrangements, physical condition and applicable requirements; the PDI record itself cannot replace that decision.
Suppliers, logistics providers and local after-sales teams can reference materials through one identifier to avoid repeatedly sending images with uncertain versions. External communication can truthfully state that the vehicle is under review, without predicting inspection results, registration results, insurance handling or repair effectiveness. If payment milestones link to handover, they should also depend on a verifiable document pack.
Keep inspection procedures on a separate checklist
IBMETRO's public page can help project teams identify inspection and certificate procedures requiring further checks. The project lead should record the access date, link, model information and questions for relevant parties, but not treat the public portal itself as a vehicle certificate. The UNECE page should likewise remain a reference for understanding the technical regulatory framework, not a replacement for specific destination-country requirements.
Keeping this separate checklist alongside the PDI pack can show sales, after-sales and document staff their respective tasks clearly: after-sales handles condition evidence, document staff check procedures, and sales manages customer-facing wording. This better supports vehicle-by-vehicle review during first-order deliveries, while handover records continuously show each vehicle's current status.
FAQ
Can a PDI form directly state "suitable for high-altitude use"?
It should not. PDI should record condition at inspection, task context and completed actions; route suitability needs other materials from ongoing validation and commercial decisions.
Do cooling and brakes need to be combined into one check?
They can be managed in one receiving pack, but observations, inspection actions and responsible people should be recorded separately so sources can be located later.
Can the IBMETRO page replace an individual vehicle inspection certificate?
No. It supports checks of inspection and certificate procedures; applicability and document requirements for specific vehicles still need confirmation under current official requirements.
Which record takes precedence if arrival findings differ from pre-shipment images?
Retain both, first confirming whether they concern the same VIN, the time between them and any intervening handovers or actions. Do not assign responsibility from only one record.
If your first-order vehicles are being scheduled for handover, you can provide your existing PDI form, VIN matching needs and pending matters through the Starvia contact page or WhatsApp. We can help organize a document structure suited to delivery review.
Public sources: Bolivia IBMETRO vehicle inspection; United Nations Economic Commission for Europe vehicle regulations. Information checked on: 2026-09-03.