Casefile
Reads the file
Document understanding
Medical, legal, engineering, financial. Scanned, photographed, handwritten. Tuned to the Australian document set rather than a translated American one.
217 document typestarget v1
Document integrity, forensic and compliance platform · Australia
We tell you whether a document is genuine - before you pay a claim, approve a loan, grant a visa, settle an invoice or open an account on the strength of it.
How the file was produced. Whether it matches the issuer's template. Whether the image has been altered. Whether the entity exists in the register. Whether the same document has appeared on another file. Insurance claims are where the Australian rule sets are built, so here it also tracks every Code, statutory and scheme deadline the file is under. In this market, an answer you cannot evidence is worth less than no answer at all.
Output from the obligation engine and the integrity examiner. Every row cites the instrument behind it. Every finding carries its source pages.
Lost to insurance fraud in Australia since you opened this page. And counting.
Every dollar counted is paid out on evidence somebody accepted at face value - an invoice, a photo, a certificate nobody forensically opened.
A convincing invoice now takes a prompt and a minute. Tools trained on yesterday's fraud have never seen the document they are about to approve.
Fabrication cost is collapsing; verification has barely started. Every quarter without evidence forensics, the gap compounds against you.
Others count the documents they have read. We count what unexamined documents cost.
The problem
A convincing payslip, bank letter, invoice, medical certificate or utility bill now costs nothing to produce and arrives in the same channel as the genuine ones. Meanwhile Australian institutions are not judged on how fast they catch a bad document. They are judged on delay, on denial, and on whether they can explain a decision eighteen months later to someone who was not there. Insurance is where that pressure is sharpest and best measured, which is why the numbers below are claims numbers.
Sectors
Whether a PDF was produced by the software it names, whether an image carries the artefacts of synthesis, whether an entity exists in the register it claims, whether this exact file has been seen before on somebody else's matter - none of those questions changes when the industry changes. What changes is the rule set. Australia has rails for this that most markets do not.
Pay or investigate. 71 rules across 8 Australian jurisdictions and 4 statutory benefit schemes, with the weekly benefit arithmetic modelled and tested. Everything on the rest of this page is this sector.
Read the worked example →Approve or decline. Payslips, statements, employment letters, valuations. The consumer data right gives Australian lenders a verified income feed that outranks an uploaded document, which is a rail that does not exist in most markets and changes what a forged payslip is worth.
Read the worked example →Onboard or refuse. Release or hold. Proof of address, bank letters, source of funds, beneficial ownership. Registered exchanges carry identification and record-keeping obligations against a document pack assembled by the applicant, and the same synthetic bank letter turns up across several platforms in a week.
Read the worked example →Grant or refuse. Bank letters, qualifications, employment evidence, relationship evidence, often across jurisdictions and languages. Closest match to the rule structure already encoded: statutory criteria with a review and appeal path on every decision.
Read the worked example →Pay the invoice, or change the bank details. Supplier invoices and payment-detail change requests. Business email compromise and fabricated invoices are the same attack from two directions, and this is the shortest path to value on the list.
Read the worked example →Advance or hold. Invoices, bills of lading, receivables schedules. Receivables financing rests entirely on documents nobody forensically examines.
Read the worked example →Only insurance is built. The rest are specified rather than shipped: the forensic core runs on any bundle today, and no rule set outside insurance has been encoded. We are stating what the engine is for, not claiming six products we do not have - and the selling stays on insurance until Australian carriers are live. See all seven worked examples.
Platform
Four of these match what the global platforms already do well. Two of them do not exist anywhere else, for the simple reason that no other regulator asks for them.
Medical, legal, engineering, financial. Scanned, photographed, handwritten. Tuned to the Australian document set rather than a translated American one.
Reconciles what each document asserts and surfaces the disagreements: dates, capacity, quantum, coverage, duplication, document provenance.
Ask the file anything. Every sentence of every answer carries a document, a page and a quote. Without an anchor the system will not answer.
ABN and ASIC registers, property and title records, Bureau of Meteorology event data, address resolution, ICA catastrophe declarations.
Every timeframe the claim is under, evaluated continuously: the Code, RG 271 dispute resolution, and the statutory clocks of eight jurisdictions.
The record your board, ASIC and AFCA all ask for. Produces the APP 1 automated decision disclosure and the CPS 230 service provider pack without a drafting exercise.
44 exhibits, 380 pages → every finding cited to its source, 6 inconsistencies, and one recommendation, as always: REVIEW.
Claim form says “original Xero invoice”. The file says otherwise: modified 11 days after creation, last written by a consumer PDF editor.
The damage photo has been through this book before - mirrored, 98.4% match to an exhibit on another policyholder’s claim.
FNOL describes a hailstorm on 11 August. The Bureau recorded nil hail in that postcode - and the roof photos were taken nine days earlier.
To SIU with the cited brief. Original invoice requested from the issuer; repairer to be verified at its ABR-listed address. Your team decides.
Approach
Speed is the easy part. The hard part is being able to show, two years on, exactly what the system saw and why anyone acted on it.
Most claims systems only see what somebody typed into a form. The problem is almost always in what nobody typed: the third page of a specialist report, a handwritten note in the margin of a certificate of capacity, a revised scope buried in a builder's email attachment.
Casefile takes the file as it actually exists. Faxes, photographs of paperwork, mixed-orientation PDFs, long correspondence threads. It turns all of it into facts that can be queried and traced back to where they came from.
It knows what a claim is. It does not know that a certificate of capacity is a NSW workers compensation instrument with a statutory review cycle, that a cash settlement carries Code obligations a repair does not, or that the insurer on a CTP file may be discharging duties owed to a regulator rather than to a policyholder.
That difference is the difference between pulling a value out of a document and understanding what the document does.
When a claims officer cannot tell why the system flagged a file, one of two things happens. They trust it when they should not, or they stop reading it altogether. Both end up in the same determination.
Every intactly finding names its factors in plain English, cites the pages it came from, and states the innocent explanations next to the adverse one. A finding that only argues one side is not evidence. It is advocacy, and it will be treated as such by anyone reviewing it.
APRA wrote to regulated entities in April 2026 naming third party AI risk, models buried in vendor platforms with upstream dependencies nobody can account for, as the largest gap it found. A claims system that cannot explain its own supply chain has become a finding waiting to be written up.
From 10 December 2026 your privacy policy has to describe what decisions are made by automated processes, what personal information they use, and broadly how they work. Ledger keeps that description current as the system changes, rather than leaving legal to reconstruct it once a year.
Comparison
The offshore claims platforms are good software. They were written for the FCA, the NAIC and the Canadian codes. What they lack here is not capability.
| Capability | intactly.ai | Offshore claims AI | General purpose LLM |
|---|---|---|---|
| Document understanding at claim file scaleThe core engine | Yes, Australian corpus | Yes, US and Canadian corpus | Partial, no layout model |
| Cross document integrity checkingWhere sources disagree | Yes, anchored findings | Yes, scored signals | No, no persistent file state |
| Code of Practice clocksAcknowledge, decide, expert reports, four months | Native | Not modelled | No |
| State scheme statutory clocksSIRA, icare, TAC, WorkSafe, WorkCover, RTWSA | 8 jurisdictions | Not modelled | No |
| RG 271 dispute resolution30 calendar days, then AFCA | Native | Not modelled | No |
| Vulnerability and hardship handlingFamily violence, hardship, mental health | Native, walled off from integrity | No local equivalent | No |
| APP 1 automated decision disclosureRequired from 10 December 2026 | Generated | Your problem | Your problem |
| Data residencyClaim content stays in Australia | ap-southeast-2 | Varies, often US inference | Varies by provider |
| CPS 230 service provider packTolerances, dependencies, exit plan | Pre-built | On request | Not applicable |
| Declines, reductions, recoveriesThe adverse calls | People only | Automatable | Unconstrained |
A finding, in full
This is the real output shape. Note what is here that a scoring product does not produce: both source pages, the named factors, and the innocent explanations.
Certificate DOC-0114 restricts lifting above 5 kg from 14 April to 12 May 2026. Rehabilitation report DOC-0139, dated 29 April 2026, records lifting estimated at 12-15 kg, inside that period.
Lines of business
This is the insurance rule set, which is the one that is built. Australia does not have one claims regulator: it has a national Code, a corporate regulator, a prudential regulator, an ombudsman, and a separate personal injury scheme in every state. Each other sector brings its own instruments, which is why entering one is analyst work rather than configuration.
Value
Every input is yours to set and every line of output states where it comes from. No industry averages, no borrowed percentages. Move the sliders. The assumptions are all on screen.
Commitments
These sit in the data model and the test suite, not in a policy document. A promise that survives a roadmap argument is the only kind worth writing into a contract.
Declines, reductions and recovery actions are recommendations only. There is no setting that changes this, which is usually the first question a board asks.
The system cannot state a fact about a file without a document, page and quote attached. Extractions without an anchor are discarded rather than downgraded.
Family violence, hardship and mental health signals are walled off from every integrity, liability and recovery path. Crossing that wall raises an error, not a warning.
Claim content stays in Australian regions, including when a model is being called. No cross border inference, and no exceptions for capacity.
Written into the contract rather than a best effort undertaking. Your file is not our training data.
Priced on claims under management. Never on savings share, recoveries or declines. A supplier that earns more when claims are denied cannot be defended at AFCA.
Talk to us
Settled claims, funded loans, granted applications, paid invoices, onboarded accounts. We examine them against outcomes you already know and show you the documents that lied. For an insurer that runs as six weeks on one portfolio against a matched control, on four numbers agreed before we start: days to decision, projected breaches per thousand claims, rework rate at internal dispute resolution, and AFCA referral rate. We publish the method with the result, and we publish nothing before there is one.
Prefer email? [email protected] · Open the live demo