Claims Decision · Reconstructability · Regulatory Scrutiny
When a claim is reopened
18 months later,
do you defend the decision —
or defend the narrative?
Most insurers can describe their governance framework. Far fewer can independently reconstruct the exact decision-state, policy version, authority delegation, override logic, and human acceptance long after execution.
Veriscopic conducts independent reconstruction testing across automated and AI-assisted claims workflows, identifying where defensibility is structurally durable — and where exposure scales silently.
Independent evidentiary reconstruction. No compliance certification. No retrospective narrative engineering.
Why reconstructability matters
A single poorly evidenced claim can trigger ombudsman escalation, litigation exposure, reserve volatility, and reputational scrutiny.
Reconstruction failure rarely arises from intent. It arises from missing version history, authority ambiguity, override opacity, or decision-state drift.
The cost of one contested claim can materially exceed the cost of systemic defensibility testing.
Engagement Levels
LEVEL 1
Reconstruction Diagnostic
£12,000 – £15,000
Interview-led simulation of how one historic claims decision would perform under regulatory or ombudsman scrutiny.
- Scenario-based reconstruction walkthrough
- Decision boundary and version review
- Gap identification
- Executive summary briefing
Designed for awareness and initial exposure mapping.
LEVEL 2
Structural Defensibility Assessment
£45,000 – £60,000
Independent reconstruction across multiple live claims pathways, producing defensibility ratings and systemic exposure analysis.
- Reconstruction testing across 2–3 workflows
- Authority-chain validation
- Policy and version traceability review
- Override governance analysis
- Structural defensibility rating
- Board-ready architecture report
Moves from single-decision protection to systemic insight.
LEVEL 3
Claims Defensibility Programme
£85,000 – £120,000
Multi-workflow reconstruction, anchored evidence issuance, and systemic defensibility architecture designed to withstand regulator, ombudsman, reinsurer, and litigation scrutiny.
- Reconstruction testing across 3–5 claim pathways
- Decision-state reproducibility analysis
- Cross-team authority consistency review
- Anchored evidence artefact generation
- Structural exposure rating
- Executive and board session
- Regulator-facing defensibility memorandum
Where Level 2 identifies fragility, Level 3 establishes scrutiny-ready posture.
FORENSIC SIMULATION BRIEFING
Review a reconstructed claims decision under scrutiny conditions
Institutional-style example demonstrating where evidentiary durability typically breaks down 12–18 months after execution.