A hirer sees their own rate
Not what the contractor across town pays for the same class of machine, which would be renegotiated within a day.
An excavator goes to a site for three months, billed by hour of engine operation. The operator reading the meter is the hirer's employee.
The figure that generates the invoice is recorded by the party who pays it.
Nobody is necessarily lying. The meter was read Friday, the machine ran Saturday, and by the time anyone compares notes it has moved to another job.
Read by the owner's driver at the yard. Written on the delivery note. Nobody from the hirer was present.
Eight hours later. Transport, positioning, and idling on arrival, all of it engine hours nobody agreed to allocate.
Reported by the site operator, who works for the hirer and has no reason to be precise about a number that generates an invoice.
Reported the same way. The owner has now billed two months on figures they have not seen the meter for.
Read at the yard again, by the owner. The total is 1,406 hours, and the disagreement is about which of them were the hirer's.
Both parties read the meter honestly. They read it at different moments, and the eight hours between the yard and the site are billed by one and disputed by the other, every time.
Hire rates differ by customer, by season, and by commitment length, and utilisation says a great deal about a contractor's project.
Not what the contractor across town pays for the same class of machine, which would be renegotiated within a day.
How hard a contractor is running equipment is a direct read on their project progress and their competitors would like it.
What sits on this belongs to the owners and hirers, not to us as a market dataset.
Keeping the infrastructure up does not put us inside a rental agreement.
What helps is how readings are captured today and what your last billing dispute was about.