Does EvidenceTrail replace our repairs system?
No. It is an overlay around existing repairs, complaints, tenant, and contractor systems. Source references remain visible so the system of record stays clear during review.
Phase 2 update
Phase 2 announced for Oct 2026: see what changes.
Buyer questions before a pilot
What does a 14-day pilot need?
A named owner, sample data, source-system references, shared inbox examples, and reviewer roles for repairs, compliance, procurement, and information governance.
What can we see in the guided demo?
A synthetic case moving from source report to evidence gaps, scoped proof requests, redaction checks, and review-ready pack limits. It is demo evidence, not customer proof or a legal outcome claim.
What can procurement review before a pilot?
The security questionnaire, DPA/DPIA notes, pricing, trust posture, procurement pack, launch blockers, and the proposed pilot scope.
What data can we use without creating a privacy shortcut?
Start with synthetic or buyer-approved sample data. Live tenant-file processing needs buyer approval and DPA/DPIA review, with the product field map on data processing notes used as the review starting point.
How does deployment work during a controlled pilot?
EvidenceTrail runs as an overlay around existing repairs, complaints, tenant communications, and contractor evidence systems. Production identity, security, and integration controls remain buyer-review items before any wider rollout.
What evidence does the pack prove?
The pack can show recorded source references, gaps, proof-link submissions, redaction status, and audit history. Source completeness still depends on buyer systems, and the pack supports review rather than proving the source estate is complete.
What legal caveats should we treat as non-negotiable?
EvidenceTrail supports evidence and review only. Landlords and advisers decide legal significance, notices, duties, and outcomes with reference to their policy, facts, and current official guidance.
Can tenants or contractors send evidence without a login?
Yes. The product direction uses zero-login proof links for scoped evidence requests, without exposing landlord-system records or internal case files. Tenants and contractors can contribute without internal accounts.
How are tenant access and no-access handled?
The pilot should separate appointment attempts, no-access notes, vulnerability context, tenant communication, and contractor evidence so reviewers can see what remains unresolved. Missed access is context for human review, not a fault decision.
What should legal, compliance, and information governance review?
EvidenceTrail names sources, gaps, redaction status, audit events, and review limits. The landlord or adviser still decides legal significance for each case.
Does it guarantee legal compliance?
No. It supports evidence gathering, statutory-clock visibility, operational review, and pack preparation. It does not decide legal compliance or outcomes.
How does pricing work after the pilot?
The pricing path stays explicit: pricing starts with the pilot plan, then moves to provider or group packaging only after rollout criteria, data scope, and procurement blockers are understood.
FAQ source and review sign-off
These answer-first FAQ entries are checked against source-register constraints and existing product evidence. They support buyer review and do not replace legal, procurement, security, or information-governance review.
- Source IDs: `govuk-social-landlords-guidance`, `uksi-2025-1042`, `housing-ombudsman-awaabs-law`.
- Official sources: GOV.UK Awaab's Law guidance for social landlords, The Hazards in Social Housing Regulations 2025, and Housing Ombudsman Awaab's Law learning resources.
- Legal-safety: PASS
- SME: PASS
- External solicitor review: NOT OBTAINED
Best next step
Start with the guided demo and a privacy-safe pilot request. Bring repairs, compliance, procurement, and information-governance reviewers into the same conversation before production tenant data is introduced.