PROVEAiBLE captures every PI enquiry the moment it arrives — mechanism, liability, injuries, treatment, the insurer’s position — and lead-scores it on strength against your own criteria. The contradiction sweep and the pre-existing-condition trap are surfaced, identifiers redacted, and the file is on a desk before you call back.
The claimant tells you what happened in their own words: the crash, the injuries, the treatment so far, and that the insurer has already been in touch. No form, no queue, no missed call.
The enquiry is lead-scored against your own criteria — a strong fit, worth a look, or triage. Number plate, VIN, licence and policy numbers are redacted before the case-analysis model sees them.
The mechanism, liability and injuries laid out — with the recorded-statement risk and a contradiction flag surfaced before you’ve dialled a number.
“I got rear-ended at a red light two days ago. My neck and lower back are bad. The other driver’s insurer already called me and wants a recorded statement — do I have to give it?”
Rear-end, clear liability, treatment under way. Identifiers — plate, VIN, licence, policy #, claim #, DOB — redacted before the case-analysis model reads a word.
Any hour, any device — the moment it arrives.
Strength rated to your rules; identifiers stripped.
Recorded-statement risk and contradictions surfaced.
In the days after a crash, an adjuster is often the first call — asking for a recorded statement while the injured person still doesn’t know the full extent of their injuries. Early words get used later to shift blame or minimise the claim. Reaching a lawyer quickly is what protects them.
In the US, for example, unrepresented claimants accept the insurer’s first offer.1
FairSettlement.orghow far below fair value first settlement offers typically sit before negotiation.2
FairSettlement.orginsurers often seek a recorded statement in the first days — early statements tend to favour the insurer, not the injured person.3
Smith & HasslerThe pressure reaches the claimant before a lawyer does. PROVEAiBLE gets their account to one — fast.
The gap PROVEAiBLE closesIn the US, represented claimants recover roughly three and a half times more on average — even after fees. Getting to a lawyer first is what makes that possible.4
Insurance Research Council data, via FairSettlement.orgThey reach a lawyer fast. The account is captured and on a desk in minutes — not after days of insurer calls.
Their words stay theirs. The story is recorded once, in full — not shaped by an adjuster’s questions.
Nothing gets minimised. Injuries, treatment and the insurer’s position are all captured up front.
A generic bot asks generic questions. PROVEAiBLE is built around the personal-injury work you actually take, the way you score it, and the requirements where you practise — layer on layer.
The PI work you actually take — motor vehicle, slip-and-fall, workplace, medical, product — not a menu of everything.
Your lead-scoring criteria, your auto-decline rules, your terminology — so every enquiry comes through already sorted your way.
Tuned to the limitation periods, fault rules and filing requirements that matter where you practise. A firm across several states gets one intake that adapts to each.
Configured with you at onboarding — we tune it to your practice before a single client sees it.
That’s the difference between an AI that scores leads the way your firm does and a chatbot that scores every lead the same.
In a US study of nearly 1,400 firms, 56% of PI firms were slow to respond or never replied at all. Replying within five minutes makes a lead 21× more likely to qualify. An always-on intake captures and scores every enquiry the moment it lands — so the fast matters are yours, not the firm down the road’s.
Sources: Hennessey Digital5 · MIT / InsideSales6The contradiction sweep flags inconsistent accounts across the client’s own documents, and the pre-existing-condition trap and recorded-statement risk are surfaced before you commit. You take the strong matters faster and spot the fraud-adjacent or unwinnable ones before they cost you — protecting the firm’s time and limiting its exposure.
Two leaks, one fix: the enquiry captured, scored and de-risked before you call back.The mechanism of the accident, who was involved and where liability sits, the injuries and treatment so far, and the insurer’s position — whether an adjuster has already been in touch. Identifiers are redacted and the enquiry is lead-scored against your own criteria, so you open a matter file that is already read.
Yes. The intake surfaces whether the insurer has already been in contact or sought a recorded statement, and runs a contradiction sweep that flags inconsistent accounts across the client’s own documents — so the recorded-statement risk and any pre-existing-condition trap are on the table before the first meeting.
Against your firm’s own criteria — the matter types you take, your qualifying and auto-decline rules, and the requirements of your jurisdiction. Every enquiry comes through sorted as a strong fit, worth a look, or triage. You set the rules; the intake applies them the same way every time.
Identifiers — number plate, VIN, driver’s licence, insurance policy number, claim number, medical-record number and date of birth — are replaced with role tags before the case-analysis model sees them, so the reasoning model never works from the client’s identity.
I’ll send you a private demo tuned to how your practice runs personal-injury intake. Or see the full product →
Free, no card, no call.
