Revenue leakage detection that gets every fee your contracts earn billed, with the clause behind each catch-up invoice
Every fee your contracts earn gets billed, with the clause behind each catch-up invoice.
See one case, screen by screen ↓Revenue leakage detection finds money your contracts entitle you to bill but your invoices never collected: price uplifts never applied, minimum commitments never trued up, usage above plan billed at the base rate, contracted fees never charged and discounts that outlive their end date. Revenue Leakage Detection does it every month across every contract, with seven agents that read the pricing terms, price the usage, compare it with every invoice line and draft the catch-up, while a person approves.
How to choose AI solutions for back-office and enterprise work →
Updated
The pricing lives in the master agreement, its schedules and its amendments. Someone keys the rate card, the minimums and the fees into the billing system once, and after that every escalator, minimum true-up and fee trigger depends on a person remembering a date. Manual overrides and one-off credits fix a complaint and are never reversed. Revenue assurance or internal audit samples the largest accounts once or twice a year in spreadsheets, and the long tail is never checked.
So the leaks are quiet: a CPI uplift never applied after an amendment re-loaded last year's rate card, a customer short of its annual minimum with no shortfall invoice, usage above plan billed at the base rate, a hazardous-goods or expedite fee in Schedule B never charged, an introductory discount running past its end date. By the time a gap is found, the contract's back-billing window has often closed. A claim without the clause and the arithmetic gets disputed and waived, one sent without telling the account manager damages the relationship, and because nobody fixes the rate card, the same leak repeats next month.
Estimated split for one review of a sample of large accounts, by hand in spreadsheets, against a monthly run of every contract with the agents.
Seven agents read every contract, price the usage, recompute each gap and draft the catch-up; the billing lead approves.
Kestrel & Vane Group's four businesses bill 1,862 customers under negotiated contracts. On Thursday 15 October the October run has finished, and Northgate Logistics' 4.0% price uplift turns out never to have been applied. Here is what happens next, screen by screen, in the working solution.
The October run finished at 05:48: 1,862 contracts, 41,236 invoices and 18.4 million usage records audited for January to September. $1,846,300.00 is recoverable across 214 gaps and 163 customers; 37 need Chris ($804,068.79) and 6 more need an analyst. The agents report as messages: the data collector held back 14 cases because the transport feed from Reno and Joliet was late, rather than audit an incomplete month.
Gap finder: “Looking the other way: 9 customers were overbilled, $61,480.00 in all … The credit notes are drafted; we never net them against a claim.”
Each customer is a pair of bars — what the contract entitles Kestrel & Vane to bill and what was invoiced — with the gap in dollars and the clause that creates it, sorted by size. The leak types double as the filter: 45 missed price uplifts ($336K), 29 minimums not trued up ($398K), 41 contracted fees not billed ($319K). $113K past a back-billing window is shown but not counted. The largest root cause is a rate card re-loaded by an amendment, $461K.
“Each approval drafts the fix to the rate card, so the same leak stops.”
The case opens as the agents' thread. The contract reader: MSA-NGL-2023-014 §6.2 raises every Schedule B charge each 1 January by the greater of 4.0% and CPI-U for the preceding September; CPI-U was 3.0%, so 4.0% applies, and §9.4 allows an under-charge to be corrected within 12 months. The data collector: nine invoices, $1,580,250.00 of Schedule B charges, 61,904 warehouse and transport events, control totals agreed. The gap finder: every invoice used the 2025 rate card, the contract entitles $1,643,460.00, the gap is $63,210.00 — because Amendment No. 3 re-loaded the rate card at 2025 prices on 14 Nov 2025 and moved the next uplift date to 2027.
The step strip reads: Read the contract · Loaded the data · Found the gap · Recomputed · Asked sales · Drafted · You decide.
Every figure and statement carries a numbered citation. Clicking §6.2 opens the passage of the Master Services Agreement — signed 12 Dec 2023, term 1 Jan 2024 to 31 Dec 2028, page 14 — with the uplift sentence highlighted, next to §6.3. The copy is read-only, kept with the case and fingerprinted, with a link to the original in the contract repository.
§6.2: “On 1 January of each year from 2025, all Charges in Schedule B shall increase by the greater of (a) 4.0% and (b) the annual percentage change in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) published for the preceding September.”
Below the month-by-month table — January's $6,736.80 to September's $7,098.00 — the recomputation agent reports. It rebuilt the charges from Schedule B and §6.2 itself, without seeing the gap finder's working, and re-rated all 2,318 invoice lines from the raw events: $63,210.00. Gap finder $63,210.00, recomputation agent $63,210.00, difference $0.00.
Its limit: any difference over $1.00 goes to a person with both workings.
Northgate is a strategic account, so the account liaison briefed Daniel Reyes with the clause, the table and a suggestion to recover in full. At 07:40 he answered on Teams: “Recover in full. They know the uplift is in the contract — their own budget assumed it. I'll call Marta Lindgren Friday morning; send after 12:00. Please copy me on the letter.” Seven gaps wait on account managers, among them Halvern Steel Fabricators' $220,000.00 annual minimum, where the liaison suggests phasing it over three invoices.
The account liaison never contacts the customer and never decides a waiver.
The recovery drafter has prepared catch-up invoice KV-LS-26-CU-0148 for $63,210.00, one line per month, net 30; the letter to Marta Lindgren quoting §6.2 and §9.4, copying Daniel, to send Fri 16 Oct after 12:00; and change request RC-NGL-2026. The amount is within Chris's $100,000 limit. He approves with REC-FULL — “Recover in full, as the contract allows” — and his name, role and the time are logged and chained.
“Approved · KV-LS-26-CU-0148 and the letter send Fri 16 Oct after 12:00.”
Change RC-NGL-2026 applies the 4.0% uplift (§6.2) and sets the next uplift date to 1 Jan 2027 from the November invoice, $84K a year; it is drafted and waits for approval like everything else. The recovery tracker checks the first invoice after each fix and reopens the gap if it is still wrong: Harcastle Freight Partners' detention fee trigger is already confirmed on its September invoice. Above it, the year runs from $6,758,900.00 found to $3,214,800.00 collected, with $412,700.00 waived — co-signed by the controller.
“Estimated across all 214 gaps: $1.20M a year stops leaking.”
Not every case is as clean. On Tamsin Home Goods, §3.4 sets the volume tier on “units shipped in the quarter, net of returns”. The gap finder counts 376,917 units shipped; the recomputation agent excludes 45,750 returned units. The agents differ by $2,745.00 — $22,615.02 gross against $19,870.02 net of returns — and the contract reader is only 72% sure how to read the clause. Amara chooses one; her choice needs a reason and is logged with both workings, and the drafts follow it.
Recomputation agent: “On 6, the answer depends on how a clause is read, so Amara decides.”
The same October run, seen by four of the people who carry it — what the month looked like, and what it looks like now.
Seven agents read every contract, price the usage, recompute each gap and draft the catch-up; the billing lead approves.
Reads every contract, schedule and amendment and extracts the pricing terms — fees, uplifts, minimums, tiers, overage, surcharges, discounts and their end dates, back-billing windows and notice clauses — each cited to its clause. Amendments are applied in date order, so each month is priced on the terms then in force.
Loads invoices, credit notes, usage events, account owners and price indices each month, and checks control totals and completeness before anything is audited.
Prices what was delivered under the contract in force and compares it with every invoice line and credit; sizes each gap by month, splits what is recoverable from what is past the window, and names the clause and the likely root cause.
Rebuilds the rate card from the contract on its own and re-rates the raw usage events, then compares its answer with the gap finder's, month by month.
For strategic accounts and gaps over $150,000, writes the account manager a brief — the amount, the clause, the customer's history and a suggested approach: recover, phase or raise at renewal — and records the answer.
Drafts the catch-up invoice, the customer letter citing the clauses and the table, credit notes for overbilling, replies to disputes and the rate-card change that stops the leak.
Follows each catch-up invoice to cash, routes disputes back with the evidence, checks that each rate-card fix shows on the next invoice, and writes the monthly report and reminders.
Approves; the controller co-signs large ones. The agents propose; a named person decides.
Ask why a customer is underbilled, what is past the window or what you owe back — or tell the agents what to change. Every answer cites its source.
Why is Northgate Logistics underbilled?
Northgate Logistics’ agreement raises Schedule B charges each 1 January by the greater of 4.0% and CPI-U. CPI-U was 3.0%, so 4.0% applies. It was never applied in 2026: $63,210.00 over nine months, and the recomputation agent agrees to the cent.
What is past the window?
$112,640.00 is past a back-billing window and is not counted. Ardent Auto Parts is the clearest case: §9.3 waives charges not invoiced within 90 days, so $6,840.00 of $14,220.00 can be billed.
What were we overbilled?
Nine customers were overbilled, $61,480.00 in all. Sable Point Hospitality had its 2.5% uplift applied twice: $5,240.00. Each credit note is drafted for approval; we never net a credit against a claim.
Phase it over three invoices
Done. I re-drafted the invoice as three instalments of $21,070.00 (30 Nov, 31 Dec, 31 Jan) and changed the letter to offer them. The recomputation agent checked the instalments add up to $63,210.00. Approve when you are ready.
13 screens from the working solution, on its sample data. Pick one to see it large.
The limits every gap is checked and approved against are settings, approved by the controller, saved as a new version with a reason and logged.
| Setting | Default | Choose from |
|---|---|---|
| Billing lead approves up to | $100,000 | Any amount · above it, and for every waiver, the group controller co-signs |
| Ask the account manager above | $150,000, and on every strategic account | Any amount; strategic flags come from the CRM |
| Small-gap batch | Gaps under $2,500, 10% sample reviewed | Any limit and sample share; one approval after the sample |
| Recomputation tolerance | $1.00 | Any amount; above it, both workings go to an analyst |
| Confidence floor for pricing terms | 80% | Any percentage; below it, an analyst confirms the term |
| Back-billing window when the contract is silent | 12 months (policy BP-4) | Any number of months; the contract's own window always wins |
| Reason codes to approve | 6 codes; REC-FULL for a catch-up, CREDIT for an overbilling | REC-FULL · REC-PHASE · REC-WINDOW · FWD-ONLY · CREDIT · OTHER (note required); add your own |
| Reason codes to reject or not claim | 6 codes | NOT-ENTITLED · RENEWAL · WAIVE (controller co-signs) · DATA-WRONG · ALREADY-BILLED · OTHER (note required) |
Every figure is labelled: a target the solution is built to, an estimate, a typical published result, or a proven one.
“demo” = seen in the working solution, on its sample billing data · “target” = the design goal, measured in the pilot · “estimated” = our estimate · “typical” = published figures (World Commerce & Contracting with Deloitte — weak contracting erodes 8.6% of contract value; EY — revenue leakage of 1–5% of EBITDA, widely quoted and not re-checked) · Revenue controls context: ASC 606 / IFRS 15 and SOX §404. Kestrel & Vane Group, its customers and the people named on this page are fictional — characters and sample data in the working solution.
Revenue leakage detection finds money your contracts entitle you to bill but your invoices never collected: price uplifts never applied, minimum commitments never trued up, usage above plan billed at the base rate, contracted fees never charged and discounts that outlive their end date. Revenue Leakage Detection does it every month across every contract, with seven agents that read the pricing terms, price the usage, compare it with every invoice line and draft the catch-up, while a person approves.
The contract reader extracts each pricing term with its clause, applying amendments in date order. The data collector loads invoices, credits, usage and price indices and agrees the control totals. The gap finder prices what was delivered under the terms in force, compares it with each invoice line and shows each customer as entitled against billed, with the gap and the clause behind it.
Every gap is computed twice by different methods. The recomputation agent rebuilds the rate card from the contract on its own and re-rates the raw usage events without seeing the gap finder's working; any difference over $1.00 goes to an analyst with both workings side by side. Every figure links to its source passage, invoice line or usage extract.
Yes. The agents read each contract's own back-billing window — or apply your default when the contract is silent — and split every gap into recoverable and past the window, which is never claimed. They also look the other way: overbillings are found and credit notes drafted, and a credit is never netted against a claim.
No. The agents act under their own identities with read access to your systems and no right to send, post or change billing. The account liaison briefs your account manager, never the customer, and the recovery drafter's invoices, letters and rate-card changes all wait for approval.
Yes. The billing operations lead approves each catch-up invoice with a reason code up to their limit; the controller co-signs above it and every waiver; account managers are consulted on strategic accounts first. Every agent step and every decision is on a chained audit trail.
Yes. Recurring checks — every uplift applied on its date, every minimum trued up, every surcharge following its index — are versioned rules with a schedule. Describe a new one in plain words; the agents draft it, run it on last month's data and show what it would have found, and it runs only after you approve it.
The Agentic Solution Engine builds and deploys it from your requirements and documents — your billing policy, a sample of contracts and the systems that hold invoices and usage — and it goes live once every quality gate has passed. Setup connects each source with a test and runs a test audit on 50 contracts before going live.
Every payment posted the day it lands, with each short pay sent to deductions on proof.
1-min demoDeduction ManagementEvery short-pay weighed on its proof: invalid dollars disputed, valid ones cleared fast.
1-min demoCollections ManagementCollector time aimed at the cash ready to move; every promise checked before it breaks.
1-min demoWe'll run Revenue Leakage Detection on a sample of your own contracts, invoices and usage.