327
Findings · validation pack
GovIQ · VerifIQ
Design verification for Irish construction. VerifIQ reads your drawings, specifications and schedules against the live Irish standards corpus — and surfaces, in the documents' own words, what a registered professional should read closely before ground is broken.
VerifIQ helps design teams, contractors and Employer-side capital programmes find document-quality issues in tender packs before issue — outdated standards, cut-paste from prior projects, missing schedules, FSC condition gaps, jurisdictional mis-references.
4.1The Contract Sum shall be the amount stated in the Tender and shall be inclusive of all obligations under the Contract.
4.2Date for Substantial Completion: ____________
4.3Liquidated damages shall apply in accordance with PW-CF5 Clause 9.5.
The pack is read the same careful way — then framed for your seat at the table.
Architects · Structural & civil engineers · M&E / services engineers · Fire engineers · Electrical designers
The full multi-discipline pack, read against the live Irish corpus before it goes out for tender.
Pre-construction · Commercial / QS · Estimating & bid teams
The tender pack read for variation exposure, mapped to PW-CF clauses — priced before award, not fought after it.
Single-discipline consultants · Small & emerging firms
A second read on your own scope, one discipline at a time, before drawings leave the office.
Estates & facilities teams · Framework holders · Multi-project developers · Local authorities
Single-tenant deployment, a full audit trail and a named reviewer on every pack across the programme.
Every discipline is read and surfaced on your register. During the pilot cohort, findings are chartered-signed within the reviewer's published scope; others are marked "AI-surfaced · pending chartered review" until the relevant specialist joins — you always know exactly what backs each finding. Read the reviewer scope ↗
Twenty drawings catch the small things. The whole pack — drawings, specifications and the contract form, read against each other — catches the expensive ones.
Architect vs structures vs M&E vs fire vs electrical — spec against schedule against drawing. The interface gaps between teams who drew their parts separately.
Does the design specification actually meet the particular and technical requirements it cites? The gap between what's required and what's drawn.
Are the design documents consistent with the public-works form of contract — PW-CF5 and the CWMF suite? The clauses that bite at award.
Withdrawn or superseded standards, and IS-versus-BS jurisdictional mis-references that don't belong in an Irish pack.
Start small with a €29 First Read on one discipline — then upload the full pack and let the cross-reference do the work. Start a First Read ↗
Branded for the people who need it — design teams, main contractors, sole practitioners.
Reads the whole multi-discipline pack against the live Irish corpus and surfaces, in the document's own words, what a registered professional may wish to read closely. Framed as "possible issues, please verify".
Scans the tender pack for variation exposure with PW-CF clause mapping — the gaps, ambiguities and missing entries a contractor can price before award instead of fighting after it.
Single-discipline, faster, cheaper. The same method narrowed to one consultant's scope — for the practice that needs a second read on its own drawings before they go out.
An anonymised Stage 2C tender pack — 161 files, read across five disciplines, every finding tied to the line in the document that raised it.
Representative of the finding types raised across the validation pack. Every finding on the real register carries a verbatim source quote, a named owner and the evidence needed to close it.
Required Schedule Part 1 fields — completion dates, damages rates — carried through to tender unfilled, so the clause that depends on them cannot bite as drawn.
Where architecture, structure, fire and M&E drew their parts separately — a fire damper on one drawing with no builder's-work opening on another, counts that don't reconcile across the set.
Superseded standard editions still cited, and BS references carried into an Irish pack where the IS or IS EN equivalent governs.
Room names, schedule rows and specification clauses that belong to a different job — the tell-tale residue of a template reused without a full read.
These are categories, not the register itself. The register is the deliverable: on the validation pack, 327 findings across five disciplines, each one source-quoted so a registered professional can go straight to the line and judge it. See the full 327 ↗
VerifIQ is in a named-reviewer pilot with Irish practices and contractors. Testimonials publish here as each cohort member signs off on attribution — nothing is quoted before they do.
Testimonial pending sign-off.
Testimonial pending sign-off.
Testimonial pending sign-off.
In the pilot cohort and happy to be quoted? Send your words ↗
How Verify, Hunt and Studio sit on one method — and who each is for.
Read ↗The pilot reviewer, the published discipline scope, and what we will and will not sign.
Meet the reviewer ↗How the same pack reads for a main contractor: a ranked € exposure register with PW-CF clause references.
Hunt landing ↗The atelier's drawing kit — severity pills, source quotations, the register in its own words.
Open the library ↗VerifIQ is a software-based reading aid. It surfaces, in the documents' own words, what a registered professional may wish to read closely. It does not certify, sign, opine, or substitute for professional judgement. The registered designer reads our output, exercises their own judgement, verifies locally, and signs. The professional indemnity remains theirs. We carry product-quality risk only.