You decide what counts as risk.
Same clause, same contract. Move their liability cap, or move your own red line, and watch both scores answer. Vern scores against you, never against a market average.
"Neither party shall be liable to the other for any indirect or consequential loss howsoever arising, without limitation as to amount."
A blanket exclusion of indirect loss with no cap is the kind of term a UK court reads against whoever drafted it. It protects nobody.
Those are the sectors our customers are concentrated in, so the playbooks are ready on day one. Vern reads any commercial contract in English, and where a sector is new to us we build the playbook from contracts you have already signed. The comparison page is honest about where we are not the right answer.
Eighteen clauses.
Five worth your afternoon.
Liability for indirect and consequential losses is uncapped. Your playbook requires a cap at or below 2× annual fees. Vern rates the clause weak as drafted, a UK court would likely read the carve-out against the drafter.
Unlimited exposure on a £48k engagement; sits outside your £2m aggregate insurance cover.
Does this clause match the position you set? Nought to a hundred, banded Accept, Negotiate or Escalate. Filled pill, everywhere in the product, without exception.
Would it actually hold up under UK law? Strong, Caution or Weak, judged independently of what you'd accept. Outlined pill, always. Nobody else gives you this one.
Then you watch the numbers move.
Redline it from inside Word. Their version comes back as round three. Vern re-scores and shows you only the deltas.
Seven ways in.
One record.
We match the specialists. We don't price like them.
There are no tiers to squeeze into.
Roughly how many contracts a month, who needs to log in, who only ever forwards an email, and which of the surfaces you'll actually use.
Volume, seats, approved senders and features are set per organisation. Nothing is bundled to force you up a tier you don't need.
Volume doubles or a team joins, we adjust the package and the price. Invoiced directly, no card on file, no minimum term dressed up as a discount.
A credit is spent only when a finished review actually reaches you.
Don't take our word for it. Take your own contract.
Thirty minutes, one of your own agreements, scored against your positions while you watch. You will know by the third clause whether this is worth your afternoon, and that is a harder test than any row of logos on any vendor's homepage.
Nothing. After that it is priced per review and invoiced monthly, with no card on file, no minimum term dressed up as a discount, and nothing spent on a review that fails. See how a package is built →
Your contracts stay in the UK and EU. Nothing you send trains a model, and that is a contractual term with our providers rather than a setting we could quietly change. Tenants are kept apart in the database rather than by application code remembering to filter, and every staff look at a document carries a recorded reason and lands in a log you can export.
Read the trust centre →Vern is built and run by AssurePath Ltd, registered in England and Wales, company number 16741039. One product doing one job, and the same company name on the invoice, the contract and the privacy policy.
Who builds it →Thirty-seven changes went into 2.0 and none of them were breaking. All of them are listed with the date and the surface each landed on, including the things we took out.
Read the changelog →It will, sometimes. Every finding cites the clause it came from, so checking takes a glance rather than a re-read, and a review that fails or times out costs you nothing. Vern gives legal information, not legal advice, and anything genuinely contentious still belongs with a solicitor.
You will not find a time-saving percentage, an accuracy rate or a trusted-by-thousands line anywhere on this site. We have not run the study that would justify one, so we are not going to print one.
Their paper. Your margin.
Thirty minutes, one of your own contracts, scored against your positions while you watch.