Customer claims shouldn’t reach your desk in June
for something that happened in January.
You've written the SOPs. You've talked to the team. You've built the spreadsheets. And yet here you are—signing off on another claim that should have been caught months ago.
Not because your people don’t care.
Not because you lack processes.
But because responsibility, timing, and information drift across teams.
Claims don’t fail loudly.
They fail slowly — until there’s no room left to defend your position.
It's not one mistake. It's a thousand small delays.
A claim arrives in someone's inbox. It sits for three days. Then it needs QA. Then plant management. Then a decision about sending an auditor. Then determining responsibility—production, packaging, logistics, the shipping company, the customer?
Each handoff is another inbox. Another WhatsApp thread. Another week.
By the time it reaches your desk for approval, the produce is gone. The port is charging storage fees. The customer won't pay until it's resolved. And you're left approving a $20,000 loss that could have been $2,000 if someone had acted in January instead of June.
You know this. You've lived it. The question is why it keeps happening.
Your team isn't failing you.
Your tools are failing your team.
Your people are trying. They're checking inboxes, forwarding emails, updating spreadsheets, chasing answers in WhatsApp threads that mix ten different topics.
The problem isn't effort. It's that none of these tools were built to coordinate work across people. They were built to send messages.
So things get lost. Delays compound. And when you ask what happened, no one can piece it together—because the trail is scattered across six platforms and twelve inboxes.
This isn't a people problem. It's a structural problem. And structural problems have structural fixes.
Claims that move—without you chasing them.
Imagine a claim arrives and the right people are notified immediately—not via email they might check tomorrow, but as a task that's clearly theirs, with a deadline, with all the context attached.
QA knows it's their turn. Plant management knows what's expected. Decisions get made because the system surfaces them. You see every open claim, where it stands, and who's holding it—right now, not in a spreadsheet someone updated last week.
When something closes, you have the full record: every decision, every conversation, every document. Not scattered across inboxes. In one place.
That's what Navgar does. It turns your SOPs into living workflows that orchestrate your team—so coordination happens by default, not by heroic effort.
Palo Blanco reduced claims payouts by 59% in one year.
Palo Blanco is a food producer in Guatemala. Same industry. Same chaos. Claims dragging for months. Money walking out the door.
59%
reduction in claims payouts
70%
fewer claims overall
73%
close on time, no payout
10 x
faster execution
““Navgar has had a significant impact on our efficiency and collaboration across teams.””
Let’s see if this fits
If you're tired of solving the same problems, let's talk. No pitch deck. Just a conversation about what's not working and whether Navgar can help.