The supplier said they'd fix it. Did they?

A supplier corrective action (often a SCAR or CAPA) is a formal request that a supplier investigate a problem, identify the root cause, implement a fix, and prove it. In Clover it runs as a structured workflow: the issue documented, the supplier's response walked through required steps, and your verification closing the loop on record.

A chargeback recovers money for a missed requirement; a corrective action fixes the cause so it doesn't recur. They often travel together, an issue can carry both, and in Clover they link: the chargeback documents the cost, the corrective action documents the fix, on the same supplier record.

Yes. You define the response steps a corrective action requires, root-cause analysis, corrective plan, evidence of implementation, and the supplier's task can't advance without them. Incomplete responses never land in your review queue looking finished.

Closure in Clover requires your verification, with reasoning, and the full loop stays on the supplier's record. When a similar issue appears later, your team sees the prior corrective action immediately and can treat a recurrence as a failed fix instead of a brand-new problem.

Clover gives you a complete, time-stamped record of every corrective action: the issue, the supplier's root cause and plan, the evidence, the verification, and who did each step. That's the documentation trail quality audits ask for, produced by the work itself rather than assembled afterward.

Yes. Because every corrective action lives on the supplier's record, their full history is queryable, not scattered across inboxes. You can see which suppliers recur, which root causes repeat, and which fixes actually held. A single corrective action is a task; the history of them is intelligence, and it answers the question quality teams actually care about: is this supplier getting better or worse?