Conflicts & risk pre-check
Conflicts and risk pre-check does the searching that sits in front of a conflicts decision. It looks for the parties, their related entities and any previous adverse positions across your matter history, then assembles what it found into a report with the near matches flagged rather than filtered out. The clearance decision belongs to your risk lead and stays there.
Step by step
Take the parties and entities
The names from intake are taken as the starting set, including the group companies and individuals named in the request.
Search the matter history
Matter records, engagement letters and closed files are searched for each name and its known variants.
Widen to related entities
Where your records show a group relationship, the agent extends the search to the entities connected to the named party.
Assemble the hits with context
Each hit is presented with the matter, the role the party played and whether the position was adverse.
Flag the near matches
Partial and similar-name matches are shown rather than discarded, because a missed near match is the expensive failure here.
Risk lead clears before proceeding
The report goes to the risk or compliance lead, who makes the clearance decision. The agent records the outcome and nothing more.
Exactly what this agent can see, touch and change
The same five controls sit behind every Askollo agent. These are this one's settings — visible before you build it, not buried in an admin screen afterwards.
Context
What reaches the modelFirms and in-house teams whose conflicts searching depends on the memory of long-serving colleagues and a search box that only matches exact names.
Escalation
When it asks a personThe risk or compliance lead clears the check before the matter proceeds
Applications & Rights
Which tools it uses, and what it may do in each
SharePointRead only
NotionRead only
GmailRead only
Google DriveReadWrites newCreates new records or documents. Never edits, moves or deletes anything that was already there.Verification
How you know it’s rightEvery claim links to the document it came from. A statement the agent cannot cite does not make it into the output — which is what makes the result reviewable in minutes rather than re-read end to end.
Who it’s for
Firms and in-house teams whose conflicts searching depends on the memory of long-serving colleagues and a search box that only matches exact names.
What you’ll need
- Matter history connected
- Entity and group data available
- Adverse-position conventions agreed
- Risk lead named as approver
What you get
- A conflicts evidence report
- A flagged list of near matches
- A record of what was searched
What it doesn’t do
It searches and reports; it does not clear a conflict. A name match is evidence rather than a decision, and it cannot see a relationship that was never recorded in your systems.
We build the first one with you
Not a template you configure alone. We sit with your team, build it on real data, and hand over the controls.
Scope
One session with the people who actually do the work. We agree what the agent reads, what it may write, and who approves.
Co-build
Built on your own data, not a sandbox. You watch it being made, so you know why it behaves the way it does.
Handover
You own the controls. Change the context, tighten the rights, move the approval gate — without coming back to us.
Parts of the work currently spread across the categories below. It does not replace any of those products outright.
Frequently asked
Is this a conflicts check?
It is the search that comes before one. The agent gathers and presents evidence, and your risk lead makes the clearance decision under your own regulatory obligations. We describe it as a pre-check for that reason, and the report is written to support a human decision rather than replace it.
How does it handle group companies?
It extends the search to related entities where your records show the relationship. Where the group structure is not recorded anywhere it can read, it cannot infer it, and the report says which entities it searched so the gap is visible.
Does it produce a lot of false positives?
It is tuned to show near matches rather than hide them, so yes, there are hits that turn out to be nothing. That trade is deliberate: dismissing a match takes a moment, and missing one does not.
What record does it leave?
A report listing what was searched, when, and what was found, filed with the matter. That record is often as useful as the result itself when a decision has to be explained later.