PRO For solicitors and funders
A structured first view of the facts, before a file is opened.
The checker exists to make the front end of a mis-selling matter consistent: the same fifteen questions asked the same way, the same eight checks applied, and the time-limit position stated by route with the rule it came from. It is a triage and intake tool, and it is deliberately not an advice tool.
| What you receive | What it is | What it is not |
|---|---|---|
| A fixed fact set | Fifteen answers on product, sale route, adviser status, firm status, risk both ways, concentration, liquidity, objective, disclosure, charges, vulnerability and complaint stage | A guess, or an inference from incomplete data |
| A documented rule set | Eight checks, each with the proposition it tests and a stated reason for the status it returns — flag, clear, or cannot assess | A score, a weighting, or a percentage likelihood |
| The time-limit position by route | The rule that applies to each route, quoted, with the source we read it from | Legal advice on limitation for a specific claim |
| The document schedule | The evidence a complaint of this shape normally needs, in the order it is usually requested | A valuation of the claim |
| A one-page summary | Plain text, download-ready, suitable as the first page of a file note or an attendance note appendix | A witness statement, or anything that should be filed as it stands |
01 Intake
What happens on a referral.
The client runs the checker themselves
They answer in their own words, in their own time, without a sales conversation. The answers are the client’s, which matters if they are ever relied on.
No document needed to complete it
Consent is separate and expressly refused
Asking us to contact them is a separate checkbox that the client can leave unticked. A refusal is recorded as a refusal, and nothing is shared.
Two consents: summary by email, and contact about the claim
The summary is generated client-side
The result is computed in the client’s browser from the answers given, so it is produced even if the email step fails. Nothing about the result depends on a network call.
Deterministic output: the reasons are in the summary
The matter reaches you with the fact set attached
The time-limit position, the flagged checks and the document schedule arrive together, so the first substantive step is to check limitation rather than to reconstruct the facts by telephone.
Suitable for a file note or an attendance note appendix
02 Standards
How the rule set is maintained.
- Every rule, limit and deadline is cited to the official source and carries the date it was checked
- Where a rule could not be verified against the official text, the page shows a visible instruction to confirm it rather than a confident claim
- The award limits, the FSCS limits and the Ombudsman’s interest approach are all periodically reviewed on publication, because they change
- No compensation figure is produced anywhere, by the tool or by a human
- No finding is stated about any named firm unless a regulator, a court or the Ombudsman has published it, and then it is cited
// To be confirmed before launch
- [CONFIRM: name of the solicitor who reviews this content]Trust section, every guide byline
- [CONFIRM: ICO registration number]Footer, /privacy/, /cookies/
- [CONFIRM: professional indemnity insurer and cover level]/for-solicitors-and-funders/
- [CONFIRM: opening hours]Footer, /contact/