Project verification and due diligence
The value of due diligence lies not in the length of the report, but in whether it identifies the key fact that should stop the transaction.
We allocate verification resources according to the transaction's actual risk, concentrating a limited budget on high-risk areas rather than checking items against a template.
Due diligence is more than a checklist;
it is judgement
A report that lists facts without conclusions cannot support a signing decision — and that is the most expensive form of wasted work.
A template approach spends the budget on low-risk items while the truly critical point — an undisclosed guarantee, for example — is missed.
Registration, litigation, encumbrance and licence information sit with different authorities; non-local teams usually cannot obtain originals and must rely on the seller's account.
Without risk grading or quantified impact, a finding cannot be converted into a price adjustment or contractual protection.
Scope of work
Engage as a combined mandate,
or as a single workstream.
Verification priorities set by transaction type, size and sector — clarifying what must be checked and what can be omitted.
Item-by-item retrieval of registration data, shareholding history, asset ownership, encumbrances and seizure records.
Performance of material contracts, pending and concluded litigation, administrative penalties and environmental records.
Risks graded red, amber and green, with recommendations on price adjustment, contractual protection or termination.
A competent due diligence report should save the board one round of decision meetings.
Deliverables and timeline
Time is counted from receipt of complete materials;
the engagement confirmation prevails.
Execution path
Each milestone has a defined deliverable;
no meetings without output.
Purpose, amount and open questions
Verification items and sources
Records, visits and interviews
Supplementary checks on inconsistencies
Grading, pricing and terms
