The contractor's claim, the consultant's certificate and the cost report rarely agree, and money waits while people argue about which one is true. We run the chain that fixes this — the pains below are what we'd expect on your first site visit.
Off-plan sales fund construction, but the escrow account releases against construction milestones certified by the consultant. When the consultant's certificate, the contractor's payment claim and the finance team's cost report disagree, the release waits. One project cost chain where the certified measurement is the record every contractor claim is built from, so the escrow request is generated from postings rather than assembled from three spreadsheets — the same verified-transaction evidence we already produce for regulated lenders.
Instalments tied to milestones, post-handover plans, international buyers, several currencies, reminders sent by hand. A buyer portal built from our customer-portal pattern: payment schedule, receipts, documents and requests in one place, structurally unable to show the developer's cost side, with collections follow-up as a tracked journey instead of a phone list.
Tiered schemes, split deals, clawbacks on cancellation. Our scheme engine, which calculates instead of promises, with an exception agent that flags the deal approved thirty times in one month as the pattern it is.
A change agreed on WhatsApp, a claim that arrives with the next bill, retention held on terms nobody can quote. Variation orders as first-class documents in the chain, raised on a phone at site with a photograph and a signature, so the contractor's next claim is checked against them automatically and retention is a posting, not a memory.
Snag lists on paper, buyer disputes over what was fixed, an owners' association budget the regulator and the owners both expect reasoned. Snagging captured on a phone with photograph, timestamp and sign-off; a service-charge budget built from zero with should-cost benchmarks, so every line has a reason rather than last year plus a percentage.
Document intelligence that reads identity and source-of-funds files with the confidence shown and a person deciding every file; tax computed on every line server-side, with VAT rules for residential, commercial and mixed supplies configured with your advisers rather than assumed by us.
The QS certificate becomes the measurement record in the chain; every builder claim is built from it and every drawdown request is generated from postings. The cost report, the claim and the certificate stop being three documents.
Miss a response date and the claim is deemed due. An agent that watches every claim's statutory clock, names the owner and the date, and flags it before it lapses — the same notice-clock pattern our delay-attribution agent uses for construction contracts. It flags; a person responds.
Who has been paid for what, down the chain, is often unknowable until it matters. Payment visibility down the chain, with subcontractor declarations attached to each head-contract claim and a control-tower view of paid, claimed and outstanding by trade and by tower.
Retention and trust movements as postings from the same chain, so the report the regulator wants is a query rather than a project.
Practitioner declarations, defect registers, rectification records and the owners corporation's handover pack. A defect register built from mobile capture with photograph and timestamp, kept as evidence rather than as a spreadsheet, and a strata handover pack assembled from the record instead of re-typed at the end.
A pre-sales register tied to the finance conditions and dates that matter, buyer approvals tracked as documents against each contract, and tax computed per unit with the rules configured with your advisers.
Because the chain is the same one we run. Budget to purchase order to goods receipt to contractor claim matched to a certified measurement to payment moving only through a rule or a person: that is the core of NeauraBuild's Construction Operating System, in production, for a trade that will not use software that slows the gate down. The regulatory shapes above differ from India's; the mechanism does not. The approach is the same we take everywhere: sit with sales, site and finance on one project, write down where the fact is typed twice and where money waits, and put a working screen in front of the site engineer within weeks rather than a deck in front of the board within months.
Contractor claims matched to certified measurement for one tower, with the escrow or drawdown evidence generated from it. A buyer portal for one launch. A statutory-clock and subcontractor-exposure view for one project, in Australia. A commission engine for one sales channel, in the UAE.
When the consultant's certificate and the contractor's claim disagree, which number does finance pay, and how long does the argument take?
How many days pass between a variation agreed on site and finance knowing about it?
Can you show, today, what every subcontractor on one tower has been paid?
How is a snag list kept, and who signs that it is closed?
Who is watching the response date on every payment claim this month?
Disclosure and regulatory reporting requirements differ by emirate and by state; we scope them with your advisers rather than promise a module.
Most projects fail after go-live, not before it: the software works and nobody uses it. So we do not stop at delivery. We advise, build, implement, operate, and only then transfer, with change management and adoption run as hard as the code.
Named, scoped, switchable agents that read, reconcile, forecast, flag and draft, taking the work off your people’s desks and putting revenue back on your books. A person approves every move that touches money.
Read next: Infrastructure and construction · Digital transformation · AI and agentic systems