Reconstructed
audit packs
Assembled after the request, so they say what someone remembers.
By use case
Evidence, not assurance
Reporting, retention and the four artefacts a supervisor asks for — generated from the work rather than assembled after the request.
What you switch on
What regulatory compliance needs switched on
Reporting is the visible part. The record underneath it is the work.
Why this matters here
You will be asked what was true on a date in the past.
Not whether the control works today — whether it worked in March, what data it held, who decided, and on what basis. Most programmes demonstrate the first and reconstruct the rest badly.
Undated
parameters
A threshold with no history can be asserted but not defended.
Scattered
filings and evidence
Reports in one system, the reasoning in another, the data in a third.
4
Artefacts an auditor asks for
1 click
Evidence pack export
5–10 yr
Retention by jurisdiction
0
Days assembling packs
Workflow · Four beats
Scroll to advance
The workflow, step by step
-
Step 01
Every decision has an owner
Alerts, dispositions and reason codes recorded as the work happens, not afterwards.
-
Step 02
Parameters carry a history
Every threshold change is dated, attributed and reversible, with the measured effect attached.
-
Step 03
Filings drafted from the trail
SAR and STR built from the case rather than retyped, with jurisdiction differences handled per entity.
-
Step 04
The pack is an export
Per case or per period, containing list versions, decisions and the people behind them.
complead / cases
- Decisions this month18,204
- With named owner100%
- Reason codesstructured
complead / governance / params
- Changes logged46
- With rationale46
- Oldest retained2019
complead / reports
- Filed this month9
- Median prep time18 min
- Rejected0
complead / audit / export
- Packs generated31
- Assembly time0 days
- Retentionto policy
Decide
Govern
File
Evidence
What you answer to
What has to be retrievable, and for how long
Retention rules are unglamorous and absolute. Archived and unreadable does not satisfy any of them.
Read the compliance guides
FIU
Filing within the statutory window
From detection
Supervisor
Risk assessment and its review history
Annual
Auditor
Decision record per period
5–10 years
Regulator
Model and parameter governance
Per change
Case study · Payments
Read the case study
An MLRO who stopped preparing for reviews
A quarterly evidence-assembly exercise became an export. The review turned into a reading exercise, and the parameter history answered questions that used to require a meeting.
0
Days assembling packs
46
Parameter changes logged
100%
Decisions with an owner
Cross-family links
Where teams like yours go next
FAQ
Before you ask us
Can we prove a control was working on a past date?
Yes. List versions, parameter history and decision logs are dated and retrievable per period.
Do you file on our behalf?
No. Drafts are generated from the case trail; the filing decision and the submission remain yours.
What about several jurisdictions?
Formats and deadlines are handled per entity while the underlying suspicion process stays single.
How long is the record kept?
To your retention policy — five years in most regimes, ten where required, and retrievable for the whole period.
Bring the question your last auditor asked
We will show you where the answer lives, and what the export looks like.
3,000+
Data sources checked
220+
Countries covered
15 min
Always real-time data