Northline Works offer
Formal offer with complete scope and an original 50% upfront term.
View synthetic documentPublic end-to-end case
See the documents, the AI mistake, the correction, and the decision.
This worked kitchen-renovation example shows how Quoveya separates source facts, missing information, interpretation, and recommendation instead of hiding them behind one score.
1 · Original evidence
Start with the source documents
Open each document and verify the values used later in the comparison. The page references simulate a realistic multi-page offer while keeping the examples easy to inspect in any browser.
BrightOak Interiors offer
Lower headline price with disposal excluded and demolition unclear.
View synthetic documentCedar Studio offer
Highest price, fastest delivery, broad scope, and balanced payment terms.
View synthetic documentNorthline payment amendment
Later email changing only the payment schedule to 30/50/20.
View synthetic document2 · Provider review
Confirm which providers were detected
Provider names are proposed before document assignment. The email sender “N. Works Sales” is not confidently matched, so the amendment remains visibly unassigned.
Formal offer NW-104 assigned.
Proposal BO-77 assigned.
Quotation CS-202 assigned.
3 · Raw extraction and provenance
Facts remain connected to their sources
“Not stated” is different from “excluded.” An uncertain amendment is not allowed to overwrite a confirmed value until a reviewer resolves it.
On a small screen, scroll sideways to review all suppliers.
| Field | Northline | BrightOak | Cedar |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total incl. VAT | €22,140NW-104 · page 1 · total | €21,480BO-77 · page 1 · total | €24,120CS-202 · page 1 · total |
| Required scope | Demolition, disposal, installationNW-104 · page 2 | Demolition not stated; disposal excludedBO-77 · pages 2–3 | Demolition, disposal, installation, commissioningCS-202 · pages 2–3 |
| Payment | 50 / 40 / 10NW-104 · page 1 | 30 / 60 / 10BO-77 · page 1 | 20 / 50 / 30CS-202 · page 1 |
| Delivery | 6 weeksNW-104 · page 1 | 8 weeksBO-77 · page 1 | 4 weeksCS-202 · page 1 |
| Warranty | 5 yearsNW-104 · page 3 | 2 yearsBO-77 · page 1; coverage unclear | 3 yearsCS-202 · page 4 |
4 · Human correction
An AI assignment error stays reviewable
Amendment arrives
The later email states a revised 30/50/20 schedule and references NW-104.
Provider is uncertain
The shortened sender “N. Works Sales” is initially not assigned to Northline. Quoveya flags the source instead of silently changing BrightOak or Cedar.
User confirms the relationship
The reviewer assigns the email to Northline Works and marks it as superseding only the original payment schedule.
Comparison updates
Northline’s payment term changes to 30/50/20. Its price, scope, delivery, exclusions, and warranty remain unchanged.
5 · Normalized view
Headline price and adjusted planning cost tell different stories
| Provider | Quoted total | Planning adjustment | Adjusted comparison | Key trade-off |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Northline | €22,140 | €0 known required-scope gap | €22,140 | Complete scope and long warranty; six-week delivery |
| BrightOak | €21,480 | €600 stated disposal option + €840 labeled demolition allowance | €22,920 | Lowest headline price; final demolition cost and warranty coverage unresolved |
| Cedar | €24,120 | €0 known required-scope gap | €24,120 | Fastest and broadest scope; highest confirmed price |
The €840 demolition value is a planning assumption, not a quoted price. It must not be presented as supplier evidence.
6 · Questions and communication
Turn gaps into specific supplier questions
Open questions
- BrightOak: Is demolition included? If excluded, what is the fixed price?
- BrightOak: What exactly is covered by the two-year warranty?
- Northline: Confirm the amendment supersedes only the payment schedule.
- Cedar: What approval and hourly rates apply to changes?
Example email
Subject: Clarifications for proposal BO-77 Hello, Before we complete our comparison, please confirm whether demolition is included. If it is excluded, please provide a fixed price. This question comes from pages 2–3, where disposal is excluded and demolition is not stated. Please also confirm what the two-year warranty covers. Thank you.7 · Decision explanation
A recommendation with conditions, not a black-box winner
Current fit: Northline Works, subject to final confirmation
Northline currently offers the lowest reviewed planning cost among the offers with complete required scope, a five-year workmanship warranty, and an improved payment schedule after correction. Cedar is the stronger alternative if the four-week delivery is worth the additional €1,980. BrightOak should not be rejected solely on price, but its demolition cost and warranty coverage need written clarification before its adjusted total can be relied on.
Interpretation: This recommendation depends on the current priority of scope certainty and commercial balance. A schedule-critical project could rationally select Cedar instead.
Ready to compare your own evidence?
Create a private project. Verify decisive values against the original documents.
Create a comparison