Send us one batch. Get it back finished.
One queue, 30–50 of your own cases, 3 working days, free. You get the completed work in the format your channel expects, every determination citing its source, plus a recording of the whole path from incoming case to released result.
Four answers. That is the whole entry.
Which deadline are you working to, and what does missing it cost?
A regulator’s response window, an examination period, free time on a container, a submission calendar. Both halves matter: a deadline with no consequence is an operational preference, and we would be selling you a speed improvement you can buy cheaper elsewhere.
Which queue misses it, and how often?
One queue, not a department. The narrower the unit, the faster the first batch comes back and the more honestly you can judge it — a broad brief is how a trial turns into a project nobody can score.
Who releases the finished work?
The role, not the name. That person has not been told about us yet, and their name does not belong in our systems before they have. If nobody holds it, that is the decision to make first — without us.
Can you send 30–50 real cases as an export?
Real ones. Not a slide, not a redacted screenshot of one. A signed data-processing agreement comes first, always — and if de-identified cases are the sensible way to start, say so and we will scope the batch that way.
The agreement comes first. Then the data.
- A signed data-processing agreement before a single case leaves your building — not a formality that follows the batch.
- Your own instance, in-region, with customer-managed keys. Read-only. We never train on your data.
- The batch is deleted on request, and on completion by default. What we keep is the fact that we did the work, not the work itself.
- No case leaves the instance. Nothing is shared with a third party, and no sub-processor sees it that is not named in the agreement before you sign.
When we are not the right people.
- No deadline set by someone other than you, and no cost to missing it. Speed on its own is a thing you can buy more cheaply than this.
- No queue you can point at. If the answer is “everything is slow”, the first batch has nothing to be measured against.
- Nobody who can release the finished work. We do not decide; we assemble and cite. Without an approver there is no last step.
- No way to send real cases, ever. Not “not yet” — a permanent no. We work on your files or we do not work.
If one of these is a “not yet” rather than a no, say so in the form. You get the recording of a comparable case instead, and we pick it up when the answer changes.
One case, end to end.
The lead queue, as an example. The batch you send back is the same shape: an incoming unit, the work done on it with every fact carrying its document, and a finished result waiting for your named approver.
Worked example · synthetic data · not a customer result
Health insurance · denial management and resubmission
Incoming: A rejected inpatient claim with its remittance advice: denied for insufficient documentation of medical necessity, AED 41,200 net claimed, one resubmission already used.
- The case file is assembled: the discharge summary, the operative note, the payer’s own policy wording on the procedure, and the benefit table in force on the date of service — not today’s.
- The denial reason is answered line by line. Each rebuttal cites the document, version and page it rests on, and the coding is re-checked against the code set current at admission.
- Where the file genuinely cannot support the claim, that is said plainly and the case is flagged to dispute rather than resubmit — because the second attempt is the last one.
Back to you: A submission-ready resubmission with its coding rationale and evidence pack attached, in your RCM system, waiting for the revenue-cycle lead to release or reject it.
The reason the citations matter here rather than anywhere else: you get two resubmissions, so a rebuttal has to be right the first time. A cited rebuttal survives review; an asserted one burns the attempt.
Regulatory figures on this page are drawn from secondary reporting retrieved on 27 July 2026 (Al Tamimi & Company; GCC Board Directors Institute; DIFC and ICC publications). Confirm the current text of any instrument before relying on it contractually.