Questions and boundaries
Before a billing review
What the proposed pilot would need, what it could produce and where the check stops.
Who is the proposed pilot for?
Australian commercial cleaning businesses with recurring customer agreements and contract records held separately from billing records. The owner, finance manager or person responsible for invoicing would confirm the terms and review findings. Repeated billing complexity matters more than company size.
What records would it need?
Authorised agreements, approved amendments or changes, and invoice and credit records for the agreed period. Suitable permissions and data-handling arrangements must be settled before anything is supplied. This preview accepts no files.
What would the review produce?
A customer-confirmed reference schedule, comparison report and review discussion. The proposed output distinguishes a match, potential discrepancies, accepted exceptions and missing evidence. Every finding shows its agreement reference and billing reference, the period it covers and the status it was given, so you can trace it back to the records.
Why the name Clause Copilot?
Contract clauses set prices, dates and conditions. Those confirmed terms provide the reference for the check. Copilot describes assistance with review while you retain decision-making authority.
Does it replace our bookkeeper or billing software?
No. The proposed pilot compares supplied records alongside your existing process. It would not make accounting changes. If your current process already performs this check efficiently, an additional service may not be useful.
Does Xero connect today?
No. There is no Xero connection or other accounting integration in this preview. A future integration is not included in the proposed pilot. The initial input would be agreed, authorised records after data-handling arrangements are settled.
How are credits and missing amendments handled?
A properly allocated credit reduces the net recorded amount. In the fictional Park Street Medical example, an A$3,200 invoice less an A$200 credit matches the A$3,000 fee. A missing amendment can leave the expected amount unknown, as it does for fictional Wattle Court. An unknown difference stays unassessed.
Does a difference mean a customer owes money?
No. It may reflect a credit, approved waiver, missing evidence or dispute. The customer or their authorised adviser needs to establish the facts and any entitlement before acting. A flagged amount is not a legal debt or promised recovery.
Does the pilot cover legislation or compliance?
No. It checks billing records against confirmed commercial terms. It does not monitor legislation, provide legal or tax advice, determine enforceability, assess SWMS/SDS, certify NDIS compliance or collect debts.
Why is there no subscription commitment?
The proposed A$599 pilot is one bounded, founder-assisted review. Whether repeated checking adds enough value after initial corrections remains unproven. There is no automatic subscription, separate setup fee or ongoing price commitment for this proposed pilot.
Is the service ready to use?
It is a proposed pilot in development, not a finished automation platform. The supplied evidence establishes no paying Clause customers or customer results. Delivery testing, engagement and data-handling arrangements, final scope and applicable GST treatment need to be settled first. This preview accepts no applications, real documents or payments.
A defined scope before a commitment
Read the full proposal or inspect the fictional review.