For valuation firms
The report is the easy part. Defending it is the work.
A practice does not lose time writing valuations. It loses time assembling the grid in a spreadsheet, chasing the encumbrance certificate that has not arrived, retyping figures into a template, and then answering a reviewer who wants to know where a rate came from four weeks after the person who chose it moved on. That is what this is built around.
Six problems
What actually goes wrong between the site visit and the signature
None of these are AI problems. They are bookkeeping and evidence problems that a drafting model makes faster and worse if you put it on top without fixing them first.
The adjustment grid lives in a spreadsheet, and the reasons live in someone’s head
A grid with percentages and no rationale is indefensible four weeks later, and it is the most common thing a reviewer objects to. Here the rationale is a required field rather than a comment column — an adjustment cannot be stored without one — so the reason a comparable was moved down eight per cent is on the record next to the eight per cent.
A junior averaged four comparables and it looked like a rate
It always does, which is why the software will not produce one. Below the minimum comparable count the valuation is refused and the refusal names the minimum. Past the maximum age or radius, likewise. And if the adjusted rates still span more than the threshold, the outliers are named and it stops — because a wide spread after adjustment means those were not comparables, and averaging them is how that fact gets hidden.
The figures in the report do not tie to the working
Usually because somebody rounded twice, or because a figure was typed into a paragraph rather than computed. Both are closed off: the arithmetic is exact decimal throughout and rounds once at the boundary, and a number that appears in rendered prose without a valuation line behind it blocks the render. A portfolio totals identically per property and in aggregate, to the rupee.
The report went out asserting clear title, and the certificate was never on file
This is the failure that ends a registration rather than costing a fee, so it is the one with no bypass anywhere in the software. Every assertion about ownership, tenure, encumbrance or approvals must resolve to a registered instrument, a title chain entry, an encumbrance row or an approval on file. Where it does not, the job stops before anything is drafted and names the missing document. There is no flag, no permissive mode and no senior override.
An analyst’s draft went out over a partner’s name
Preparation and signature are different acts and the software treats them that way. An analyst can prepare and cannot sign; a valuer signs only within the asset class their registration actually covers, checked at the moment of signing; a deliverable with an open review note cannot be signed at all. Until somebody signs, every export carries a draft watermark — and that watermark fails closed, so an export that arrives without a status is treated as unsigned rather than assumed final.
Two clients’ mandates are one undifferentiated pile
The firm sits on every row and is applied in the layer that builds the query, so there is one place scoping can be forgotten rather than one per screen. A read, list, search or download across firms answers as though the record does not exist. That matters more here than the equivalent rule elsewhere: confirming that a mandate or an address exists is itself the disclosure.
The review, not a feature
Everything here is shaped by the fact that somebody will check it
A valuation is the one deliverable whose value is entirely in whether it survives being taken apart. So the software is built for the reviewer as much as for the author.
- Click any figure in the report and walk down to the line, the adjusted comparables and the imported row.
- Click any statement about title and the registered instrument opens.
- Notes are raised against a specific section or a specific comparable, assigned, answered and closed — not left in an email thread.
- The spreadsheet export keeps the grid’s formulas live, so a reviewer can change an adjustment and watch the rate move rather than taking yours on faith.
- Every read and export is on an audit log with the actor, the address and the time.
A mandate, end to end
Five steps, and the signature is only the last one
- 01
Instruct
Client, purpose and basis of value recorded — none of them defaulted, because the purpose decides which methods the valuation may conclude on.
- 02
Assemble
Documents, title chain, encumbrances and approvals on file, with what is missing shown as missing rather than as an empty section.
- 03
Adjust
Comparables on a map, then the grid: a percentage and a reason per factor, with the adequacy checks visible while there is still time to act on them.
- 04
Reconcile
Three approaches, three indicated values, weights that sum to one and each with its reason. Divergence past the threshold is refused, not averaged.
- 05
Review and sign
Notes raised and closed, then a partner or a registered valuer with the right asset class signs — and only then does the watermark come off.
Said plainly
The drafting is the easy half
A model that writes a fluent valuation report is not hard to build and is not worth much. The work is the grid, the evidence, the reconciliation and the trail from the figure back to the sheet — and the drafting is only safe to add once those exist, because a fluent report over an unadjusted average is worse than no report. If your practice does not look like the six problems above, tell us where this page is wrong about it; that is worth more to us than agreement.
Tell us where it is wrongSigning valuations a bank or a tribunal relies on?
Then you are the person best placed to tell us where this is wrong about your work — and the fastest way to judge it is against a report you have already had to defend.
Get in touch
Talk to the people building it
No chatbot and no ticket queue. Tell us what your practice actually looks like — how many valuers, which asset classes, who reviews, which banks you are on the panel of — and someone who works on the software will reply.
info@legosphere.com