I have asked for a technical contact and assessment scope. The sales reply describes the damage as superficial without identifying what they reviewed.

That description needs a basis. I would send the impact-area views together with the shifted supports and equipment identifiers, then ask their technical person to explain the proposed assessment.

They now have the linked arrival views and identifiers. I have not opened the enclosure or removed the remaining supports to make a cleaner photograph.

Your installer might be able to propose a local inspection with the seller's technical team, Jamie. I'd get scope and costs discussed first, including anything the impact could have affected beyond the visible mark, rather than booking an undefined visit.

And keep the receiving note with that pack. Does it record the damaged crate, or have you only got the separate photographs?

The receiving note records the crushed corner. Our installer is willing to submit an inspection proposal, but no visit or cost allocation is agreed yet.

Jamie, willingness to propose a visit is useful, but keep the damaged equipment held until the qualified assessment determines the next steps. Sales calling it superficial does not release it.

Did the technical contact answer at all? We once got three fresh sales assurances while the service team hadn't even seen the photos.

Chen, that's worth checking directly. Jamie should ask for the technician's acknowledgement of this evidence pack, not another assurance forwarded without a name

A named technician has acknowledged the photographs and requested the installer's proposal. No assessment result yet. The package remains unpowered and our fixture-loading installation is postponed.