How to identify conflicting accounts in documents

1. 1.List the specific claim each document makes

   For every document, write down the specific factual claims it contains, such as a date, an amount, or a statement of what was agreed. Keep this at the level of individual facts rather than summarising the whole document in one line.

2. 2.Group claims by topic or event

   Bring together all the claims relating to the same event, such as everything anyone said about when a delivery was made, so you can see every version of that single fact in one place.

3. 3.Compare dates precisely

   Check whether dates given for the same event actually match, since apparently small differences, such as a date being one day out, can matter a great deal depending on the dispute. Note the exact wording used in each document rather than paraphrasing.

4. 4.Compare figures and amounts precisely

   Where documents state numbers, such as a price, a quantity, or a measurement, check them against each other exactly rather than assuming rounding explains a difference. A genuine discrepancy is worth flagging even if it seems minor.

5. 5.Note who made each statement

   Record who authored or is quoted in each document, since a contradiction between two statements from the same person carries different weight to one between two different people or organisations.

6. 6.Distinguish a contradiction from a gap

   A contradiction is when two documents make incompatible claims about the same fact; a gap is when a fact is simply not addressed anywhere. Keep these separate, since they need to be described differently and often matter for different reasons.

7. 7.Record each conflict with its exact sources

   For every contradiction you find, note which two documents conflict, quote or closely paraphrase the relevant part of each, and state plainly what the disagreement is, for example 'Document A states the meeting was on 4 June, Document B states 6 June'.

8. 8.Avoid concluding which account is correct

   Record the conflict itself rather than deciding which version is true, since that judgement usually depends on evidence or context you may not have. Simply presenting the conflict clearly is often the most useful thing you can do.

In a workplace grievance, a manager's written statement says a meeting took place on 4 June and that the employee raised no concerns. The employee's diary entry and a calendar invite both show the meeting was on 6 June, and an email sent by the employee on 5 June raises exactly the concern the manager says was never mentioned. Listed side by side with exact dates and sources, this contradiction becomes clear and specific rather than a vague disagreement about what was said.

A contradiction is a direct conflict between two documents about the same specific fact, such as a date, amount or statement. An inconsistency is a broader term that can also include unexplained gaps, vague wording, or details that do not quite fit together even without a flat contradiction.

Spotting contradictions is a precise task, and vague comparisons tend to miss what matters.

• Summarising documents so loosely that a real discrepancy is smoothed over
• Comparing paraphrases instead of checking exact wording or figures
• Declaring which account is correct instead of presenting the conflict
• Failing to note the source document for each side of a contradiction

TraceFolio includes a contradictions and inconsistencies section in every report, comparing facts, dates and statements across up to 20 uploaded documents and citing the specific source file or passage on each side of a discrepancy it finds.

It also lists missing or uncertain information separately, but it does not determine which of two conflicting accounts is true; that judgement, and any conclusion drawn from it, is left to you, an ombudsman, or a legal adviser reviewing the underlying documents.