Conflicts and data policy
Either side, never the same dispute
TrueNorth analyzes preference exposure and claims disputes for creditors and for estates. The analysis is the same in either direction, because the statute is. What follows is how the two are kept apart, and what happens to the records an engagement puts in our hands. It is written to be held to.
One dispute, one side
We do not analyze both sides of the same dispute. Where we are engaged on a set of transfers or on a claim, we will not take an engagement adverse to that client on those transfers or that claim — not concurrently, not afterward, and not behind an internal wall. That bar is not waivable by consent.
It is drawn at the dispute, not the case. A large estate carries hundreds of separate matters, and an engagement in one does not close the rest: we may screen a portfolio for a trust and separately analyze an unrelated creditor’s claim in the same case. Where that happens, both clients are told in writing before we accept, and either may decline. We do not claim an internal wall we could not staff — disclosure is the mechanism, and it runs before the engagement rather than after.
Some engagements have no opposing side. Where both parties retain us jointly, or where a mediator or the court directs a single computation both sides will work from, that is a neutral engagement. It is identified as one to everyone involved, and we hold no party engagement in that dispute while it runs.
Consent cures a great deal. It does not cure analyzing both sides of the same transfers, so that one is simply declined.
Run before scope, before data
Every prospective engagement is checked against the full register of prior and active engagements — by case, by debtor, by related entity, and by the specific transfers or claim at issue — before scope is discussed and before any client records are transmitted. The check runs in both directions and is recorded with the date it was performed.
Where the dispute is the same, we decline and say why. Where the case overlaps but the dispute does not, we disclose to both clients and either may decline. Either way the check is part of the engagement record, so the question can be answered later from a document rather than from memory.
We are not counsel and this check is not a substitute for counsel’s own conflicts analysis, which reaches parties and interests ours does not.
What happens to what you send
-
A defendant list is never a prospect list
An estate engagement puts the names of every potential defendant in our hands. Those names are never used to solicit anyone on them, and never used to inform outreach of any kind — not during the case, not after it closes, not indirectly, and not in aggregate.
-
Engagement records stay inside their engagement
Client records are used to produce that engagement’s findings and for nothing else. They are not pooled, not used to build comparative datasets or benchmarks, and not carried into unrelated work. Where an analysis cites market or docket context, that context comes from public filings.
-
The analysis runs locally
Client ledgers and payables are processed on controlled local systems, and the analysis engine transmits no client records. Where a screen requires public-record verification — corporate status, registered agent, whether a party is itself in bankruptcy — only a party’s name is checked against public sources, with the source and date recorded.
-
Retention is per engagement
The complete derivation behind every figure is retained with its engagement, so that findings can be supported later where there is a legal reason to produce them. Retention terms, including disposal, are set in the engagement agreement rather than by this page.
What we are, and what we are not
-
Not a law firm.
We are an analytics firm. We compute and document findings from records. We do not provide legal advice, do not appear, and do not negotiate. Every engagement is structured for presentation through counsel.
-
Not affiliated with any party to a case.
We are not affiliated with any debtor, trustee, liquidating trust, claims agent, or court, and nothing we produce is a communication from or on behalf of any of them.
-
Never paid on outcome.
No contingency, no percentage of recovery, no share of a settlement or of a reduction achieved — on either side. A screening record produced by someone paid more when it comes out one way is not a record.
-
Findings, not conclusions.
What the records show is ours to state. What it establishes, what to file, and what to pay are legal questions, and anything turning on legal judgment is flagged as an open question for counsel rather than resolved quietly.
Questions about a specific case, including whether a conflict exists, are answered directly — contact us or see estate services.