DC-Services UK Company Milestones

Statement of Fact schema, version one

The first formal schema for the Statement of Fact was released after the supervisory separation was in place. Version one defined the document into named sections: identification of the asset, identification of the controlling party, observed state, evidence references, supervisor remarks, and retention block. Each section had a defined purpose so that two statements from different engagements could be compared on a section-by-section basis. The schema was published internally and re-issued to staff with each subsequent revision.

• ›Written intake brief signed by the client
• ›Conflicts screen and independence check
• ›Defined deliverable list and retention envelope

Retention and sealed archive policy

The firm adopted a written retention policy specifying that every released document is stored in a sealed archive with restricted access. The policy defines who may unseal a record, under what request, and how the unsealing is logged. It also defines the minimum retention period and the conditions under which a record may be destroyed. The retention policy is the reason every page on this site refers to documents as released under controlled access; it is a policy term, not a marketing phrase.

• ›Source hashing at intake
• ›Role-based, time-bound access
• ›Two-stage review before release

Codified exclusions: custody, advice, success fees

The board formally codified the firm's exclusions: no custody, no advice, no success-fee arrangements, no trade execution. Codification means that an internal proposal to enter any of these activities now requires a board decision to amend the standing exclusion list, rather than a silent change of practice. The exclusion list is referenced in every engagement letter so that the client receives the same written boundary the board uses for internal decisions.

Annual methodology review cycle

The firm established a fixed annual cycle in which the methodology, the schemas, and the supervisory QA procedure are reviewed against the previous year's rejection register and any external feedback received. Changes that result from the review are dated and added to the methodology change log on this site. The cycle exists so that updates do not accumulate silently between releases; if a change has not been logged in the annual review or in a dated interim revision, it has not been made.