One confirmation season, step by step.

Create the audited entity under Clients — name, registration number (KvK or IČO), country — and invite the client's signer from the same card. Then create the engagement: client × fiscal period, currency, materiality and performance materiality. Performance materiality is not decoration — it is the tolerable misstatement the ISA 530 sampling interval is derived from later.

Upload CSV or XLSX from Exact Online, AFAS, Twinfield, Pohoda, Money S3, Helios or SAP-style exports. The two-step import previews the file, suggests a column mapping from Dutch, Czech and English headers, and handles "1 234,56", "1.234,56", "(500)", dd-mm-yyyy dates and mixed code pages — Windows-1250 and Windows-1252 are told apart by scoring, not guessed. Rows the parser cannot read are rejected with the reason and the raw cell, never silently skipped. Re-importing never destroys evidence: prior rows are superseded, not deleted, and the supersession is recorded on the audit trail.

Import kinds: AR balances · AP balances · Bank balances · Open items · Subsequent receipts · Subsequent payments.

A bank population is not sampled at all: every account is confirmed, overdrafts and zero balances included — a census, because an account the ledger records as an overdraft is a liability the bank confirms, not a stratum to be sampled out. Receivables, payables and general balances are sampled as follows.

One click runs Monetary Unit Sampling over positive balances — systematic PPS, top stratum always selected. The interval is performance materiality divided by the reliability factor at the confidence level the auditor states, 95% by default: a performance materiality of 1,200,000 gives an interval of 400,534.05. An auditor who plans the interval another way states it, and the basis, at approval. Explainable risk rules are added on top: round amounts, duplicate counterparty-amount pairs, off-hours postings. Every selected item stores a plain-language reason for the working paper, and the random seed is stored, so the exact sample is re-derivable at review. Curate items, then a partner approves — which locks the roster.

Create a batch from the approved sample — one confirmation per included item, carrying the ledger balance — or add confirmations by hand for any of the eight kinds the platform sends: bank balances, bank relationships, receivables, payables, legal, insurance, leases, or a general balance — with the batch's own as-of date, deadline, reminder policy and letter language: Dutch, English or Czech, end to end.

A legal request is an ISA 501 inquiry to the company's lawyers — litigation, claims and assessments, unbilled fees — and it carries no balance anywhere: the letter asks its questions, the row holds no figure, and the portal offers none to confirm. A bank relationship enquiry is the same shape at a bank: one request per bank rather than per account, asking for every account held, the loans and credit facilities with their limits and terms, the guarantees and sureties given or received, the security and pledges and over which assets, and who may sign — also with no balance anywhere. An insurance confirmation asks an insurer the same way: the policies in force at the as-of date, the sums insured and limits and deductibles under them, the claims notified, and the premiums outstanding — the premium is stated by the insurer and read against the client's records rather than reconciled, so this request too prints no balance and offers none to confirm. A lease confirmation asks a lessor the same way: every lease and rental agreement in force with its asset, its dates and its remaining term, the amount outstanding on the lessor's own basis with the payment schedule, the payments received in the period, and the residual value guarantees, options and security. Its amount is material and the client's ledger holds a relative of it — a lease liability — and the two are still not compared, because they are measured on different bases: the lessor holds the remaining rentals receivable and the client an IFRS 16 present value or, for an operating lease under Dutch or Czech GAAP, nothing at all. The figure is stated, read against the lease schedule by a person, and this request too prints no balance and offers none to confirm.

Every responder contact carries provenance (auditor-entered, client-provided, published channel, prior response, AI-suggested) and a verification tier: unverified → MX-checked (an automated pre-check on the e-mail domain, explicitly not the ISA 505 control) → auditor-verified → network-verified. Dispatch is refused below auditor-verified unless an override reason is recorded, and it lands on the audit trail — the ISA 505 / AS 2310 control, applied by the platform rather than written in a policy PDF. A curated directory — Dutch banks, and Czech banks and insurers — is shared with every firm; each entry's legal name and registration number is verified against the public register (DNB, ARES), with the institution's published confirmation channel cited where one was found, and role addresses require a cited published source. AI can suggest published channels, but suggestions are never used automatically — an auditor must verify first.

From the batch, Send for signature: the platform generates the information-release letter listing every counterparty and e-mails the client's signer a secure signing link — name, e-mail, title, one click. Until it is signed, not one confirmation in the batch can be dispatched.

The client's ten minutes →

Dispatch authorized confirmations e-mails each assigned responder a covering message carrying the secure portal link and a unique reply-to intake address, with the request letter and the signed authorization attached. The letter itself carries the reference and a QR code that opens the same portal; it prints neither the link nor the intake address, because the letter is the artefact that gets filed, photocopied and forwarded onward. Contacts on paper-only workflows get a print-ready letter that still carries the QR, so even a posted letter can be answered digitally.

Every letter and every e-mail is the firm's own business document, not a vendor's: it carries the firm's registered name, seat and registration number — and its register entry and audit licence where the firm has recorded them — labelled the way the firm's own jurisdiction labels them, and the request comes from the firm. Dispatch is blocked until the seat, the registration number and a phone and mailbox a recipient can verify the request with are all on record, because every letter must name the auditor it comes from. The result reports exactly what was sent and what was skipped, and why.

Batch view shows response rate, overdue count and median days outstanding over a colour-coded funnel of the 16 tracked states this batch is actually in. Bounces surface automatically on the affected row. The reminder policy is set per batch by the audit team — which days after dispatch a reminder goes out, when a silent counterparty is marked unresponsive, and whether automated chasing runs at all. The defaults are deliberately patient — a reminder at day 14 and 28, unresponsive at day 45 — and responders who work through their own portal or on paper are never chased by automated e-mail. A counterparty is certified unresponsive only after the chase has run, and never before the date the letter itself gave it to reply — the verdict cannot precede the request.

Responses run through OCR, extraction constrained to a fixed set of fields, and a verbatim verifier: a number "found" must literally appear in the document text, and validators check currency, as-of date and line-item arithmetic. Only a full validator pass with an exact ledger match, from a sender the request was actually addressed to, auto-accepts. Everything else lands here — source document beside the extracted-versus-ledger comparison — for Accept as extracted, Accept with corrections or Reject. A decision is taken once: a second decision on the same extraction is refused, so two reviewers cannot double-process it. There is no synthetic confidence percentage anywhere: the only confidence shown is the OCR engine's own per-field measurement, labelled as such, and no decision keys on it.

Reconciliation is deterministic first — exact, within-tolerance, currency-mismatch — with semantic name matching (legal suffixes stripped, similarity scored) when the responder states a different name. For variances, the platform scans open items and subsequent receipts for classic in-transit and timing candidates and drafts an explanation the auditor must rewrite or confirm — labelled AI draft — not audit evidence until you confirm or rewrite it.

A receivable or a payable that goes unanswered gets subsequent receipts or subsequent payments matched by the platform, with the coverage achieved and the amount still unsupported both stated; every other instrument gets the procedures the standard expects named, for the auditor to perform and attach — and a conclusion the platform refuses to write at all.

Per-confirmation working papers (PDF and XLSX) are regenerated from the event log on every fetch — a stale copy is never served. Batch lead schedules summarize per-books, confirmed, difference and status per row. At close-out, Export evidence pack (ZIP) exports one ZIP: manifest, a fresh verification verdict for the audit trail, a provenance log for every extracted figure, signed authorizations and certificates, dispatch letters, response documents, and all working papers — with the engagement's materiality, performance materiality and each batch's ISA 530 sampling basis stated at the top of it, so a regulator reads the basis of the selection before the selection — and it declares anything it could not include rather than asserting completeness. Designed to ISA 505 / AS 2310 documentation requirements.

Every section of the paper, and what a reviewer receives →

The request arrives by e-mail, carrying the secure portal link and a unique reply-to address. The letter travels with it — attached, or printed and posted — and carries a reference number and a QR code that opens the same portal; the link is never set in readable type on it. Answer through the portal, or reply to the e-mail; the paper letter's QR code opens that same portal. Both channels end in the same evidence store. Banks that run their own confirmation portals get a workflow type that respects their process and never chases them with automated reminders.

A reply that reaches the firm another way — by post, by fax, in the firm's own mailbox, or downloaded from a bank's own confirmation portal — is filed by the auditor onto the confirmation with a statement of which route it came by, the day the firm received it and who received it. That statement is the document's provenance, and it is printed wherever a reviewer weighs the document.

Four tiles: Confirm as stated (one click, name recorded), Upload our statement (PDF, image, spreadsheet, Word, text or CSV, up to 25 MB), Type the balance with discrepancy notes, or We cannot confirm — a structured refusal with a reason code, recorded as a refusal rather than as silence (ISA 505), which stops the reminders and routes the item to alternative procedures. Dutch, English and Czech, auto-detected from the request, switchable by the reader. On a legal request the two balance choices are not offered at all: the lawyer answers the inquiries in writing, or uploads a document.

Replying to the covering e-mail routes the message — attachments and all — straight to the right confirmation: the reply goes to the unique intake address that message was sent from, which is why nothing has to be retyped or filed. If there is no usable attachment, the e-mail body itself becomes the evidence document. Mail that matches nothing is quarantined for a person to route, never silently dropped.

A response through the portal — or an e-mail reply from the institution the request was addressed to — upgrades that contact to network-verified, the strongest provenance tier: earned rather than asserted. A reply from anywhere else is still taken as evidence, but it is recorded as a sender mismatch and routed to a human rather than quietly strengthening the contact, because ISA 505 makes a response from an unexpected source exactly the doubt an auditor must resolve. If a responder stays silent, escalating reminders follow the batch policy with the original secure link still valid.

The responder's side, in full →