Our method

The method page exists so instructing parties know what happens after the engagement letter is signed. It is the same sequence we use on our flagship forensic transaction review.

1. Instruction and conflict check

We confirm who instructs us, who may receive findings, and whether we have conflicts with entities already on our books. Work does not start until the letter is signed and the mobilisation deposit is received.

2. Scope freeze

Period, entities, currencies, and transaction classes are written into the letter. Mid-engagement expansions are possible but require a revised fee note — we do not silently widen sampling to chase hours.

3. Document hold and intake

You nominate a coordinator. We log every file received: ledger extracts, bank PDFs, invoices, contracts, and internal memos. Altered “clean” copies produced after the hold date are treated as secondary and noted as such.

4. Planning memorandum

Partners set sampling thresholds, full-trace criteria for high-value items, and the list of counterparties that always get vouching. The plan is shared with the instructing party before heavy fieldwork.

5. Tracing and exception logs

Reviewers vouch selected lines to bank evidence and third-party documents. Exceptions — missing support, circular flows, weekend postings, related-party opacity — land in a living log with status and owner.

6. Draft findings

A draft letter goes to the instructing party for factual correction only (wrong dates, misread amounts). We do not negotiate conclusions that the evidence does not support.

7. Final letter and briefing

The final findings letter, workpaper index, and a closed briefing close the engagement. Questions that require new fieldwork become a separate instruction.

When this method is a poor fit

If you need a continuous bookkeeping service, a statutory audit opinion, or software to monitor payments in real time, we are the wrong practice. If you need a bounded human review of contested transactions, request a review.