The one rule that decides every DataQs case.
Here is the whole game in a single sentence: a DataQs challenge is decided on evidence. When you file a Request for Data Review — the RDR — a reviewer reads what you claim happened, then looks at the documents you attached to see whether they actually prove it. If the proof supports the correction, you win. If the proof is missing, or if two pieces of evidence say different things, the case stalls.
For a crash-preventability review, FMCSA marks that outcome "Undecided." For other RDRs it simply closes "with no data correction made." Either way it's the polite version of "you didn't show me enough to change the record." So the packet is not a formality you staple to the real argument. The packet is the argument.
And this isn't a slogan — FMCSA's own numbers show it. In the agency's review of 2012–13 filings, crash challenges submitted with supporting documentation were corrected about 72% of the time, versus 53% without; inspection challenges with documentation were corrected about 78% of the time, versus 41% without. On inspections, evidence nearly doubled the odds. And FMCSA is just as blunt the other direction: a letter that simply claims the record is wrong, with nothing attached, is not sufficient, and an RDR filed with no evidence is denied.
78%
Inspection RDRs with documentation — corrected
41%
Without documentation — corrected
72%
Crash RDRs with documentation — corrected
53%
Without documentation — corrected
That changes how you should think about this. Before you write a word in the description box, ask one question: what document, in someone's hand, proves my version is the true one? If you can name that document and you can get it, you have a case worth filing. If you can't, you're about to file something that comes back Undecided — and you're better off spending that energy getting the document first.
The rest of this lesson is the answer to that question, sorted by the kind of record you're fighting. Find your category, gather the proof listed under it, and you're filing from strength.
Inspection and violation disputes — prove the line is wrong.
This is the most common DataQs filing: a roadside inspection landed a violation on your record and the violation is wrong on the facts. There are four clean ways to be right here, and each one has its own winning document.
It's not your driver, or not your carrier
The inspection got attributed to the wrong party — common after a lease change or when two carriers share equipment. For a misattributed carrier, the documents analysts look for are the lease or rental agreement, the shipping papers, the driver's logbook, and the IRP cab card. For a misattributed driver, it's the license, medical card, and trip records. Federal rules require a carrier to retain inspection-related supporting documents for at least six months, so the paper you need should still exist.
There's a plain factual error
The report says a tire was bald and it wasn't, or it cites a defect the equipment didn't have. The proof is the condition of the equipment at the time: dated repair invoices, maintenance records, and photographs that show the actual state of the part the inspector flagged.
A court threw out the charge
This is the adjudicated-not-guilty path — powerful, but only with the right paper. The proof is the official court disposition: a certified copy of the court or tribunal's record showing the charge was dismissed, you were found not guilty, or it was reduced — or a web link that goes directly to the official court or agency result. A screenshot of a docket won't carry it. And know the catch: a dismissal where you paid a fine is treated as a conviction and won't be removed, so your document needs to show a clean outcome.
What gets these marked Undecided: a vague description with nothing attached; a photo with no date you can tie to the inspection; a "court disposition" that's really just a continuance or a payment receipt, not a final outcome.
For the step-by-step filing process, see the how to dispute a roadside inspection lesson.
Crash preventability — the CPDP packet.
This is the crash you concede happened to you, but you couldn't have prevented it — you were rear-ended at a light, struck by a wrong-way driver, hit while legally stopped. The Crash Preventability Determination Program reviews these, and if FMCSA finds the crash Not Preventable, it comes out of your Crash Indicator calculation.
CPDP has a hard requirement the other categories don't: you must attach a Police Accident Report. No police report, no review — that's the floor. On top of it, you bring the evidence that demonstrates two things: that the crash is one of the eligible types, and that you couldn't have prevented it.
That supporting evidence is dashcam or surveillance video, scene and damage photographs, and insurance documents. Video is the strongest single asset you can bring here — clean footage of the other vehicle causing the crash settles cases that a written report leaves ambiguous. Trim it to the relevant seconds; don't dump an hour of road.
What gets these marked Undecided: filing CPDP with no police report at all; video that starts after the impact and shows nothing about fault; a crash that doesn't actually match an eligible type.
For the full eligible-type list, see the Crash Preventability Determination Program lesson.
Crash-record errors — when it isn't about fault at all.
Not every crash dispute is about who's to blame. Three crash-record errors have nothing to do with preventability, and they're often the easiest wins on the board.
It isn't your crash
Attributed to your DOT number by mistake. The proof is the police report and your trip records showing your truck and driver were nowhere near it.
It isn't a DOT-recordable crash
A crash only belongs on your federal record if it meets the recordable definition — a death, an injury where someone was treated away from the scene, or a vehicle towed from the scene because of disabling damage. A fender-bender that produced none of those isn't recordable. The proof is the police report and the tow records — or the absence of a tow.
It's a duplicate
The same crash entered twice. The proof is the matching report numbers and dates showing the two entries are one event.
What gets these marked Undecided: a police report that's incomplete or unreadable; claiming "not recordable" while your own attached records show a tow for disabling damage.
For filing details on each type, see the crash-record errors lesson.
Registration, authority, and insurance — fix the paperwork record.
This is the unglamorous category that can quietly flag you as out of compliance. Your registration data is wrong, your operating-authority status is misreported, or an insurance filing isn't reflecting correctly.
The proof is the source paperwork itself: your registration documents and MCS-150 confirmation, your authority records, and the insurance policy or the filing confirmation from your insurer. You're not arguing a judgment call here — you're showing the reviewer the document that says what the record should say.
What gets these marked Undecided: a screenshot of a status page instead of the underlying document; an insurance dispute with no filing confirmation from the carrier that issued it.
Driver PSP and CDLIS — the data that follows the person.
Some records ride with the driver across employers — the Pre-Employment Screening Program report and CDLIS. When a wrong inspection or a bad data point sits on a driver's PSP, it's the same evidence logic as an inspection dispute, filed against the driver's record: identity documents proving misattribution, the court disposition for an adjudicated charge, and the inspection or repair records that show the factual error.
How to assemble a clean packet.
A winning packet has four habits, regardless of category.
Lead with the one document that proves your point
Label everything. The reviewer should never have to guess what a file is or why it's attached.
Make every piece consistent
The single fastest way to land in Undecided is to attach two documents that disagree — a description that says one date and a police report that says another. Reconcile your own evidence before the reviewer finds the gap.
Trim it
Relevant footage, the pages of the report that matter, the dated photos. A focused packet reads as credible; an unsorted pile reads as "I'm hoping something in here works."
Write the description to point at the proof
Two or three plain sentences: here's what's wrong, here's the document that shows it, here's the correction I'm asking for.
The packet is not a formality you staple to the real argument. The packet is the argument.
— The packet rule
Common reasons disputes fail.
Every one of these is avoidable, and every one of them produces a denial or an Undecided.
No supporting evidence attached — the single biggest cause of Undecided.
For a crash: no Police Accident Report (required for CPDP, and your strongest asset for any crash-record dispute).
Undated or unlabeled photos that can't be tied to the inspection or crash.
A "court disposition" that's a continuance or receipt, not a final outcome.
Internal contradictions between your own attached documents.
Filing the wrong category — sending a Clearinghouse accuracy problem in as a standard data review instead of the DataQs Clearinghouse Violation Petition.
A claim the evidence doesn't actually support (a "not recordable" crash whose own records show a disabling tow).
Evidence-by-dispute-type.
Keep this open before you submit. Match your dispute type to the proof column, then cross-check against the Undecided column to see the traps.
Wrong driver · wrong carrier · factual error · adjudicated-not-guilty
Wrong driver: license & med card · trip records
Factual error: dated repair/maintenance records · equipment photos
Adjudicated: certified court disposition (dismissed-without-fine / not guilty / reduced) or direct link to official court result
Not mine · non-recordable · duplicate
For timelines — when the 21-day Initial clock starts, when Reconsideration kicks in, and what "Undecided" means for your appeal path — see the timelines and appeals lesson.
Bad data on your record costs real money.
A DOT-audit review pulls your SAFER/SMS profile, finds the disputable lines, and helps you assemble the evidence that wins before you file — so a winnable correction doesn't come back Undecided.