CASE
STUDIES

Fleet Team partnered with a nationwide company operating across 78 locations and managing a fleet of 785 material handling assets. The organization battled rising costs on repair and maintenance activities — often seeing high-expense invoices over $4,000. A lack of visibility into service necessity, and insufficient control over vendor invoicing, created a costly challenge for the operations and finance teams.

Fleet Team launched its Insights Program to support clients in managing/reducing maintenance expenses across large Material Handling Equipment (MHE) fleets. Over the course of 48 months, we’ve implemented this program across 439 client locations, analyzing data from 11,240 assets to pinpoint the root causes of rising repair and service costs.

Fleet Team, a brand-agnostic fleet management and consulting company, partnered with a nationwide organization operating 1,132 material handling assets across 67 locations. The organization’s operations team, along with senior financial stakeholders, sought to address escalating costs tied to underperforming fleet assets. Despite a large equipment base, data revealed a significant portion of their vehicles were either rarely used or completely idle, driving unnecessary lease and ownership expenses.

• 1,600+ assets were returned from lease
• Client was expected to pay lease-return fees on equipment before return
• Client exposure was > $6.5M

• Two-party leasing creates flexibility throughout the asset lifecycle
• Realistic residuals allow the client to avoid end of life fee
• 
Implement holistic fleet maintenance plans to ensure proper maintenance of asset
• 
Lease rate is determined by utilization, maintenance, and usage

• High repair and maintenance spend
• Assets beyond useful economic life
• Too many under-utilized assets

• Asset utilization analysis guides leasing terms and scheduled services
• Optimized asset lifecycle
• Liquidated assets not required for production or backup
• Negotiated aggressive buyouts for overutilized equipment to avoid overtime and lease return fees.

• Frequent downtime of owned assets, causing production delays
• Inefficient vendor management
• No spend thresholds or standards
• Limited insight of entire fleet
• No visibility of overall spend

• Streamlined vendor management
• Increased production efficiency by implementing R&M program with spend thresholds
• Utilized national account partnerships = Cost-effective equipment replacement
• Identify root cause and reduce repetitive damage issues

• Corporate decided to close a manufacturing facility
• Location had 300 assets that needed to be sold or reallocated quickly
• Client Exposure = $1.8M of early return leases, pre-tax

• Sold assets not needed to secondary market partners
• Re-allocated most assets to other facilities that were over-utilizing their equipment