Find missing invoices
and supplier balance differences.
A supplier statement lists what a supplier says you owe. Reconciliation means comparing it with your own records. We help organise that comparison and highlight missing invoices, credits or payments for your finance team to check.
Give the handoff
a clear owner.
A statement total can look wrong for several reasons: a payment is in transit, a credit has not arrived, an invoice is missing, or the statement and ledger cover different dates. A credible workflow explains the difference before anyone adjusts the books.
See the route.
Keep the exceptions visible.
- 01
Import
Retain the statement and a dated ledger extract.
- 02
Normalise
Standardise references, signs and dates without losing original values.
- 03
Compare
Match agreed fields and separate ambiguous candidates.
- 04
Resolve
Assign differences to a named reviewer and record the supporting evidence.
Two invoices have the same amount and similar references. A suggested match remains a suggestion until supporting evidence makes the relationship clear.
A proposed design using fictional examples. The actual workflow depends on your systems, authority rules and approved scope.
A balance difference with an explanation
A fictional statement lists three invoices and one credit. Two invoices match the ledger. A third invoice is missing, while the credit appears under a different reference. The review queue keeps those cases separate so a person can request the invoice and confirm the credit without forcing an incorrect match.
This is consultancy and implementation scoped to your records and systems. It does not replace your accountant, promise a debt recovery result or automatically write adjustments into a ledger. Any posting requires a separately agreed control.
Something your team
can operate.
- A documented matching hierarchy with explicit tolerances
- A reconciliation view showing matched and unresolved records
- An exception queue with reason, owner and supporting reference
- An operating procedure for reruns, corrections and period close
How we check it works
- Reverse a credit sign in a fictional test and confirm it is flagged.
- Test repeated amounts, missing references and one payment covering several invoices.
- Keep a cross-period payment visible rather than silently matching across cut-off dates.
- Rerun the same source files and confirm the review state remains consistent.
Checks are adapted to the selected workflow and signed off with the responsible team before wider use.
Scope the work
before the build.
Begin with sample-led discovery: the sources, decisions, exceptions and supported interfaces. Agree a bounded pilot, compare it with the current process and complete the recovery and handover checks before rollout.
Multi-team investigation and implementation can run across several days and reporting cycles. The written proposal separates consultant effort, elapsed delivery time, licensing, training and ongoing support. A fixed one-day promise would hide the work needed.
Can every statement be matched automatically?
No. Layout quality, inconsistent references and missing evidence affect what can be matched safely. A sample-led assessment establishes the useful automation boundary and the review work that must remain.