Start Free
Start Free
Anonymised sample · Release Assurance Pack

What a signed Assurance Note looks like.

A Release Assurance Pack checks every claim in one deck, page or proposal against its source. Each claim gets a status, a severity rating and an evidence grade from A to E. Weak claims are rewritten, and a named verifier signs a one-page Assurance Note. This sample covers an anonymised 12-slide investor deck.

Book Release Assurance Pack Read the Sample

Signed by a named verifier · 3 business days · Accuracy Commitment

Anonymised sample · What you receive

One pack, in this order.

Report
Release Assurance · Release Assurance Pack
Note ID
RA-2026-014 · Version 1.0
Client
Northlane Systems Ltd (anonymised)
Asset
12-slide investor deck
Asset version
File name, date and SHA-256 redacted
Scope
Every factual claim on all 12 slides and in the speaker notes
Out of scope
Financial model, design, the data room
Verifier
Pranav Unni, Founder & Lead Verifier
Turnaround
3 business days
  1. SummaryThe counts, the release status and the three problems to fix first.
  2. 01 · Claim registerEvery claim in scope: status, severity, evidence grade, confidence, human re-check, source, finding and rewrite.
  3. 02 · Ranked rebuttalsThe objections a careful reader would raise first, worst first.
  4. 03 · Rewritten claimsSourced replacements, ready to paste back.
  5. 04 · Clean version of the assetYour deck with every rewrite applied.
  6. 05 · Assurance NoteOne page: what was tested, found and rewritten, which claims got a full human re-check, where AI was used, and who signed it.
  7. Appendix A · Method and definitionsWhat each status, severity, grade and confidence level means.
  8. Appendix B · Source logEvery source used: what it was used for and how it was archived.

Summary

24 claims checked, three to fix first.

24claims checked
  • 16Verified
  • 5Supported
  • 2Flagged
  • 1Unverifiable
Full human re-check
11 of 24 claims
Release status
Ready once R-01, R-02 and R-03 are applied
SeverityVerifiedSupportedFlaggedUnverifiableTotal
High712010
Medium42017
Low52007
Total1652124

Fix these three first

  1. C01

    The cover overstates paying customers by 44.

    “Trusted by 140” counts trial and churned accounts. The billing export shows 96 paying accounts. It is the first number on the first slide.

  2. C02

    “The only platform” is disproved by two public pages.

    Two competitors list native Xero and Sage sync. The integration is real; “only” is not.

  3. C03

    The analyst badge cannot be traced.

    No public listing and no report supplied. Held back until the client can show it.

01 · Claim register

Every claim checked, and every weak one rewritten.

Eight of the 24 claims in this deck, shown in full. Every claim in the register carries the same fields. Definitions are in Appendix A.

Statuses VerifiedSupportedFlaggedUnverifiable Evidence grades A CorroboratedB AuthoritativeC PartialD WeakE Speculation

IDClaimWhereStatusSeverityEvidence gradeConfidenceHuman re-check
C01 “Trusted by 140 UK mid-market finance teams.” Slide 1 (cover) Flagged High B Authoritative High Full
C02 “The only platform with native Xero and Sage sync.” Slide 5 Flagged High B Authoritative High Full
C03 “Named a Cool Vendor by a leading analyst firm.” Slide 5 Unverifiable Medium E Speculation Low Full
C04 “UK B2B finance automation is a £1.4–2.1bn market by 2027.” Slide 3 Supported Medium C Partial Medium Sampled
C05 “Cuts month-end close time by 38% (median of six customers).” Slide 7 Verified High B Authoritative High Full
C06 “SOC 2 Type II certified.” Slide 10 Verified High B Authoritative High Full
C07 “Backed by a UK venture fund.” Slide 11 Verified Low A Corroborated High Sampled
C08 “Founded in 2021 by two former finance-systems leads.” Slide 11 Supported Low B Authoritative Medium Sampled

Claim detail

C01

Customer count

Flagged

“Trusted by 140 UK mid-market finance teams.”

WhereSlide 1 (cover)

Severity
High
Evidence grade
B Authoritative
Confidence
High
Human re-check
Full
Evidence and rewrite
What we checked
The client billing export against the customer count, cross-checked with seat counts.
What we found
The billing export shows 96 paying accounts. The 140 includes 44 trial and churned accounts.
Source
Client billing export, dated two weeks before review (client document, not published).
Rewrite
R-01
C02

“Only platform” claim

Flagged

“The only platform with native Xero and Sage sync.”

WhereSlide 5

Severity
High
Evidence grade
B Authoritative
Confidence
High
Human re-check
Full
Evidence and rewrite
What we checked
Competitor integration pages and the client’s own release notes.
What we found
Two named competitors list both integrations on their public integration pages. The client’s own sync has been live since 2024.
Source
Two competitor integration pages, archived and dated. Client release notes.
Rewrite
R-02
C03

Analyst listing

Unverifiable

“Named a Cool Vendor by a leading analyst firm.”

WhereSlide 5

Severity
Medium
Evidence grade
E Speculation
Confidence
Low
Human re-check
Full
Evidence and rewrite
What we checked
The analyst firm’s public vendor lists, and a request to the client for the report.
What we found
No matching entry, and the client could not supply the report.
Source
None found. Named, not guessed.
Rewrite
R-03
C04

Market size

Supported

“UK B2B finance automation is a £1.4–2.1bn market by 2027.”

WhereSlide 3

Severity
Medium
Evidence grade
C Partial
Confidence
Medium
Human re-check
Sampled
Evidence and rewrite
What we checked
Every published estimate we could find for the category and year.
What we found
Three published estimates sit between £1.4bn and £2.1bn. The earlier draft quoted only the top figure, from a vendor-sponsored report.
Source
Three third-party market reports, each dated and linked in the source log.
Rewrite
R-04
C05

Month-end close

Verified

“Cuts month-end close time by 38% (median of six customers).”

WhereSlide 7

Severity
High
Evidence grade
B Authoritative
Confidence
High
Human re-check
Full
Evidence and rewrite
What we checked
Recomputed the median from the six customer close-time logs supplied.
What we found
The median is 38% and the range is 22–51%.
Source
Client pilot logs, recomputed by the verifier.
Rewrite
None needed. Keep the range next to the median.
C06

Security certification

Verified

“SOC 2 Type II certified.”

WhereSlide 10

Severity
High
Evidence grade
B Authoritative
Confidence
High
Human re-check
Full
Evidence and rewrite
What we checked
The auditor’s report: period, scope and opinion.
What we found
Period, scope and opinion match the claim. The audit period is not on the slide.
Source
Independent auditor’s report, issued within the last 12 months (client document).
Rewrite
None needed. Add the audit period to the slide.
C07

Funding

Verified

“Backed by a UK venture fund.”

WhereSlide 11

Severity
Low
Evidence grade
A Corroborated
Confidence
High
Human re-check
Sampled
Evidence and rewrite
What we checked
The fund’s portfolio page and the company’s public filings.
What we found
Both list the investment.
Source
Fund portfolio page and Companies House filing, both archived and dated.
Rewrite
None needed.
C08

Founders

Supported

“Founded in 2021 by two former finance-systems leads.”

WhereSlide 11

Severity
Low
Evidence grade
B Authoritative
Confidence
Medium
Human re-check
Sampled
Evidence and rewrite
What we checked
Companies House incorporation date and both founders’ public profiles.
What we found
The incorporation date matches. Both prior roles are confirmed, though “finance-systems lead” is one profile’s wording, not the other’s.
Source
Companies House record and two public professional profiles.
Rewrite
R-08

02 · Ranked rebuttals

What a careful reader would challenge first.

The objections a buyer or investor would raise, ranked by how likely they are to check and what it costs if they do. Each one points to its fix in the next section.

Release Assurance Suite (£1,749 plus applicable taxes) adds a parity check when the same claims appear across three or more assets.

  1. C01 · The customer count
    Who raises it
    An investor in diligence
    The objection
    “Send me the customer list behind the 140.”
    Why it hurts
    The gap of 44 accounts is found in minutes and remembered for the rest of the process.
    Fix
    R-01
  2. C02 · The “only platform” claim
    Who raises it
    Any buyer comparing tools
    The objection
    “Two of your competitors list the same integrations on their sites.”
    Why it hurts
    Superlatives are the claims checked first. One that fails makes the rest of the deck look careless.
    Fix
    R-02
  3. C03 · The analyst badge
    Who raises it
    A careful reader
    The objection
    “Which report, which year? I can’t find you on their list.”
    Why it hurts
    A badge nobody can find is worse than none. It makes the reader doubt the claims around it.
    Fix
    R-03

03 · Rewritten claims

Ready to paste back.

Each claim that needs new wording comes back with a sourced replacement. Highest severity first.

  1. R-01 · Customer count (C01)

    Before“Trusted by 140 UK mid-market finance teams.”

    After“Used by 96 UK mid-market finance teams.”

    SourceClient billing export.

  2. R-02 · Integrations (C02)

    Before“The only platform with native Xero and Sage sync.”

    After“Native Xero and Sage sync, live since 2024.”

    SourceClient release notes.

  3. R-03 · Analyst listing (C03)

    Before“Named a Cool Vendor by a leading analyst firm.”

    AfterHeld back until the report is supplied, then cited with the year.

    SourceNone yet.

  4. R-04 · Market size (C04)

    Before“UK B2B finance automation is a £1.4–2.1bn market by 2027.”

    AfterWording unchanged. Footnote added naming the three reports and their dates.

    SourceThree third-party market reports.

  5. R-08 · Founders (C08)

    Before“Founded in 2021 by two former finance-systems leads.”

    After“Founded in 2021 by a former Head of Finance Systems and a former Finance Systems Manager.”

    SourceCompanies House record and two public profiles.

04 · Clean version of the asset

Your deck, with the fixes in.

The 12-slide deck comes back in its own format with every rewrite applied and each changed line marked with its rewrite ID. The slides are not shown here because they would identify the company. What changed:

  • Slide 1R-01Customer count corrected to 96 paying teams.
  • Slide 3R-04Footnote added under the market-size range.
  • Slide 5R-02, R-03“Only” removed; analyst badge taken off until the report is supplied.
  • Slide 10C06 noteAudit period added next to the SOC 2 Type II badge.
  • Slide 11R-08Founders’ exact prior job titles.

05 · Assurance Note

One page, with a name on it.

Release Assurance · Release Assurance PackNote RA-2026-014 · Version 1.0
Asset
Investor deck, 12 slides (file name, date and SHA-256 redacted)
Scope
Every factual claim on all 12 slides and in the speaker notes. One asset (Pack scope).
Tested
24 claims, every claim in scope
Found
16 Verified · 5 Supported · 2 Flagged · 1 Unverifiable
Rewritten
2 flagged claims rewritten with a citable source. 2 supported claims tightened.
Held back
1 claim held back until evidence is supplied (C03).
Full human re-check
11 of 24 claims: every decision-critical and high-impact claim, plus every Flagged and Unverifiable claim. The rest were sampled.
Release status
Ready once R-01, R-02 and R-03 are applied.
AI use (EU AI Act Article 50)
AI was used to extract claims, find and read sources, and draft statuses, grades and rewrites. Every status, grade and rewrite was checked by the verifier before signing.
Limitations
The financial model and data room were out of scope. Public sources were read on the review date and may change.
Guarantee
Accuracy Commitment: if any factual claim in this Pack is not supported by its cited source, or is a factual error we should have caught, tell us within 30 days of delivery. We correct and re-sign it within 5 working days; if we cannot fix it, you do not pay for that Pack.
Pranav Unni Named verifier: Founder & Lead Verifier, ThriveFinity · Signed [date redacted]

Appendix A · Method and definitions

What every label means.

Statuses

  • VerifiedMatches a primary source the verifier has seen. Wording accurate as written.
  • SupportedSubstantially true, but the evidence is partial or second-hand, or the wording needs tightening.
  • FlaggedContradicted by the evidence, or overstated. Rewritten or removed before release.
  • UnverifiableNo evidence found or supplied. Held back until it is supplied.

Severity

  • HighDecision-critical or high-impact: prices, guarantees, legal or security statements, headline results, anything a reader could act on or walk away over.
  • MediumSupports the case. An error would embarrass or weaken trust.
  • LowIncidental detail.

Evidence grades

  • A · CorroboratedMultiple high-authority, recent, independent sources fully corroborate the claim.
  • B · AuthoritativeOne or two authoritative, recent sources; no significant contradictions.
  • C · PartialCredible but older than 12 months, or partial coverage; minor contradictions.
  • D · WeakWeak sources, significant gaps, or major contradictions present.
  • E · SpeculationSpeculation only: no retrieved evidence behind the claim.
Confidence
How sure the verifier is that the status is right: High, Medium or Low.
Human re-check
Full means the verifier personally re-opens the source and re-reads the claim before signing. Every decision-critical and high-impact claim gets a Full re-check, and so does every Flagged and Unverifiable claim. Other claims are sampled.
Evidence grade and status
The grade rates the evidence the status rests on. A Flagged claim can be grade B when authoritative evidence contradicts it.

Appendix B · Source log

Every source, dated and archived.

In the real pack each row carries the URL, the verbatim quote and the access date. They are redacted here because they would identify the company.

#SourceUsed forArchive
S1The deck as received (file hash recorded)All claimsClient file, SHA-256 recorded
S2Client billing exportC01Client document, held on file
S3Two competitor integration pagesC02Archived copies with SHA-256, dated
S4Analyst firm’s public vendor listsC03Archived copies, dated
S5Three third-party market reportsC04Public pages archived, dated
S6Client pilot logs (six customers)C05Client document, recomputation attached
S7Independent auditor’s SOC 2 reportC06Client document, held on file
S8Fund portfolio page; Companies House filings and recordC07, C08Archived copies, dated

Who signed this report

Signed by a named verifier.

Pranav Unni · Named verifier · ThriveFinity

Release Assurance · Release Assurance Pack · Note RA-2026-014 · Version 1.0 · Issued [date redacted] · Anonymised sample

On every Release Assurance Pack, the named verifier re-checks every decision-critical and high-impact claim, signs the Assurance Note with their name and the date, and states where AI was used. Names, figures and sources on this page are anonymised.

  • Release Assurance Pack
  • Anonymised sample
  • AI use disclosed
  • Accuracy Commitment

Get Your Claims Checked.

Send us a deck, page or proposal. We check every claim against its source, rewrite the weak ones, and a named verifier signs the note.

Book Release Assurance Pack Try a Free First Signal

Signed by a named verifier · 3 business days · Accuracy Commitment

Keep exploring

Related reading