Step 1
0-6 min
Fit request and first-session frame
Confirm the buyer context, pilot price shape, legal boundary, and the workflow artifacts expected from the first working session.
Output: A scoped first-session agenda, not a legal opinion request.
Pilot walkthrough
What the 90-day ECCTA Defence File Pilot looks like.
The walkthrough is built around the first working session: scope posture, evidence gap map, associated-person chase list, board-pack blockers, and the follow-up evidence needed before production onboarding.
First session output
Scope screen, gap map, chase list, and board-pack blockers.
The setup guarantee is limited to producing workflow artifacts. It does not certify scope, reasonable procedures, privilege, legal advice, or defence success.
First-session agenda
Thirty minutes from intake context to blocker list.
Step 2
6-9 min
Scope posture
Open the Zenith Mutual scope posture, keep the wording to appears likely, appears unlikely, or uncertain, and preserve reviewer prompts for legal confirmation.
Output: A reviewable scope workpaper with source dates and uncertainty visible.
Step 3
9-18 min
Evidence gap map
Show how the fictional risk register, training export, control matrix, quarterly monitoring review, all-staff briefing, and due-diligence replacement memo map against all six Home Office fraud-prevention principles without treating mapped evidence as legal conclusions.
Output: A visible 6/6 gap map with source links, review status, and remaining blockers separated.
Step 4
18-21 min
Attestation chase list
Show Northstar Introductions as the pending high-risk introducer, Helio Partners as the completed response, scoped attestation links, overdue owners, and the no-account external response path.
Output: A chase list for associated-person evidence owners.
Step 5
21-30 min
Board-pack blockers and trust close
Close on the two fictional board-pack blockers: human review still needed for two evidence items, and the high-risk introducer attestation still pending.
Output: A blocker list and buyer follow-up pack, not certification of reasonable procedures.
What good looks like
A coherent fictional file, still blocked where review is unfinished.
The Zenith Mutual exemplar is deliberately fictional. It shows how a buyer should expect source evidence, human decisions, replacement history, and attestation state to line up across the product without implying legal sufficiency.
Board fraud prevention minutesDraft top-level commitment evidence waits for named review before sign-off.Fraud risk registerApproved risk evidence links to the high-risk introducer scenario and board-impact blocker.Introducer due diligence replacement memoA rejected due-diligence file is closed by an approved replacement lineage.Northstar pending attestationThe high-risk fictional relationship remains visible until the zero-login response is returned.
- Every fictional sample evidence item is labelled as demo evidence and tied to at least one review surface.
- Mapped principles, review decisions, replacement lineage, and attestation state agree across workspace, review, risk, onboarding, and export pages.
- Board-pack blockers stay visible even when the exemplar covers all six principles, so buyers can see the difference between coherence and sign-off readiness.
Demo tenant screens
Screenshots are local demo evidence, not customer proof.
These screenshots were captured from the deterministic Zenith Mutual demo tenant. They show product workflow state and are labelled as demo screens in the image itself.
The fictional Zenith Mutual scope posture uses cautious wording and reviewer prompts; it does not certify that an organisation is in scope.
The exemplar maps nine fictional evidence items across all six principles — including monitoring and review, communication, and training — while keeping remaining review blockers visible.
Northstar stays pending as a high-risk fictional introducer while Helio shows the completed response state.
The blocker view explains why the exemplar file is coherent but still blocked before sign-off.
Buyer brings
Inputs that make the first session useful.
- One real evidence bundle suitable for pilot review.
- One high-risk associated-person group or supplier population.
- A General Counsel, compliance, or legal-ops reviewer for named decisions.
- A board, audit-committee, or steering date that the blocker view should support.
- Owners for deployment, DPA/order-form, field metrics, configured email, and customer UAT evidence.
After 90 days
Outputs available for buyer, board, and adviser review.
- Scope posture workpaper with source dates and adviser-review flags.
- Evidence register with source metadata, replacement lineage, and freshness status.
- Review trail showing named approvals, rejections, and requested changes.
- Associated-person attestation status and chase backlog.
- Board-pack export state with unresolved blockers kept visible.
- Readiness evidence ledger separating local product proof from external production proof.
Boundary
Workflow support, with the legal line left intact.
DefenceFile organises ECCTA readiness evidence, review trails, source metadata, attestation state, audit events, and board/adviser pack blockers. It does not provide legal advice, create privilege, certify scope, certify reasonable procedures, or guarantee that a statutory defence will succeed.
Next step
Ask the buyer to nominate one evidence bundle, one associated-person group, one reviewer, one board date, and one owner for each external evidence item.
Request pilot review