01 · Select
Approve a bounded source set
Begin with a named project type, closed project library or controlled reference collection—not every file the practice has accumulated.
Building surveyors · Quantity surveyors · Property consultancies
Private AI for surveyors, with professional judgement left intact
Ask questions across approved project, property, lease, report and specification documents on infrastructure you control. Each useful answer points back to its source; a qualified surveyor decides whether it is reliable and how it may be used.
Fixed scopeQuoted before work starts
Human controlDecisions stay with your team
Honest boundaryKeep existing systems where they work
A controlled question, a visible source, a human decision
The useful design is narrower than “AI reads everything”. It starts with a defined source set, preserves the evidence behind an answer and makes the review point clear before the output can influence a client service.
02 · Permit
Map who may see what
Existing identities, access groups and source permissions are assessed. The implemented rule and any limitation are tested rather than assumed.
03 · Index
Prepare documents on your infrastructure
Approved material is made searchable inside the agreed network boundary. Source files remain the evidence; the index is not treated as a new master record.
04 · Ask
Use a defined professional question
The user asks about the approved collection. Retrieval is more dependable when the task, terminology and time or project boundary are specific.
05 · Evidence
Show where the answer came from
The response links to supporting documents or passages and says when the collection does not provide a sufficient answer. A fluent sentence is never evidence on its own.
06 · Review
Record the qualified decision where required
The firm decides whether an output materially affects surveying services and what assurance record is needed. The named surveyor remains accountable for the professional use.
Fast retrieval without an automated surveying conclusion
This example shows the information boundary. It does not turn historic project records into an inspection, valuation or current professional opinion.
A surveyor needs the basis of a detail used on an earlier project
- Question
- The surveyor asks for references to the detail, relevant specification clauses and later recorded changes within one approved closed-project set.
- Retrieval
- The system returns a short summary with links to the particular report, drawing note, instruction or correspondence that supports it.
- Gap
- If documents conflict or the final position is not recorded, the answer shows that uncertainty instead of choosing the convenient version.
- Review
- The surveyor checks the originals, considers the current facts and decides whether any precedent is relevant to the present instruction.
- Record
- If the use materially affects the service, the firm follows its own assurance and written-decision process with a named, appropriately qualified surveyor.
The RICS AI standard is now in effect
RICS says its global professional standard for responsible AI use has applied to members and regulated firms since 9 March 2026. It applies to AI use that materially impacts the delivery of surveying services, and RICS says deciding materiality requires informed professional judgement.
RICS requirements
The system sits inside wider governance
RICS identifies governance and risk management, professional judgement and oversight, output reliability and assurance, procurement due diligence, and transparency with clients among the standard's central topics.
Retained accountability
A private appliance does not transfer responsibility
RICS says a written reliability decision for an output with material impact must be prepared by, or under the supervision of, an appropriately qualified and named surveyor. The firm remains accountable for its output assurance and client communication.
Not a compliance certification: Inferred can document the technical workflow and help implement agreed controls. Your firm and its advisers determine materiality, professional obligations, terms of engagement, data-protection position, insurance requirements and whether the overall use meets the standard.
Private answers can assist the file; they cannot become the surveyor
Source-cited retrieval makes checking quicker. It does not supply the site observation, context, competence or duty to the client that professional advice requires.
Useful assistance
Find and assemble existing evidence
- Locate clauses across approved reports and specifications
- Retrieve project correspondence by topic or event
- Compare recorded wording across named documents
- Prepare a source-linked chronology for review
- Identify absent, conflicting or inaccessible records
Professional work retained
Inspect, interpret and advise
- Reach a valuation or condition conclusion
- Decide defect cause, liability or remedial scope
- Determine compliance with a standard or contract
- Judge relevance to current site circumstances
- Approve and issue advice to the client
The evidence boundary: an answer can only reflect the accessible, approved material it retrieved. Missing, outdated, wrongly filed or contradictory documents remain a professional review problem.
“On your premises” needs a complete boundary
Cortex can run on hardware you own, without a third-party AI provider in the question-and-answer path. We still map every surrounding route so “private” describes the deployed system accurately rather than hiding an existing cloud mailbox, document store, backup or remote-support route.
Technical controls
Designed and tested in the scope
- Named data sources and network location
- Identity and document-access behaviour
- Source citation and insufficient-evidence response
- Logs, retention and backup treatment
- Updates, support and failure route
Practice controls
Owned by the surveying firm
- Approved uses and prohibited uses
- Competence, training and named oversight
- Risk assessment and output-assurance procedure
- Terms of engagement and client communication
- Insurer, legal and data-protection advice
Start with the use and controls, then decide whether to install
Workflow review or bounded pilot
Fixed price from £1,495
- One proposed use and source set mapped
- Data routes, users and review points documented
- Material limitations and exceptions written down
- Small demonstrator where suitable and agreed
- A stop, change or proceed recommendation
Cortex private AI
From £4,950 installed
- Local model on hardware you own
- Approved document collection configured
- Source-linked answers and access tests
- Installation, handover and team training
- Optional Care quoted separately
Excluded from both: valuation, survey, legal or regulatory advice; a declaration that your firm complies; autonomous client deliverables; and any representation that an AI output is accurate without appropriate human assurance.
Questions surveying firms ask
Does this make us compliant with the RICS standard?
No. A controlled local system can support parts of a firm's technical design, but compliance depends on the firm's use, governance, competence, risk management, assurance, records and client communication.
Can it produce valuations or survey conclusions?
Not under this offer. It retrieves and organises approved documentary evidence. Inspection, interpretation, valuation, condition assessment and professional advice stay with appropriately qualified people.
Does every AI-assisted email need formal review?
RICS distinguishes use that materially impacts surveying services and says the member or firm applies informed professional judgement to materiality. Your policy and review route must reflect the actual use, not a generic website promise.
Can client files stay inside our network?
Yes for the Cortex question-and-answer path when that is the agreed design. We also document where the source files, email, backups and support routes already go so the wider claim remains accurate.
Does it replace our document management system?
No. Your approved document store remains the source. The private AI adds a retrieval and answer layer over a bounded collection; filing, retention and authoritative record control stay in their existing systems.
What if our project files are inconsistent?
Start with one clean, closed set and test the questions that matter. If the underlying record cannot support dependable retrieval, the right outcome may be a records improvement—not an AI installation.
Bring one closed project set and one recurring question
The first call is fifteen minutes and free. We will define the source, access, evidence and review boundary and tell you whether a private document workflow is useful—or whether better filing would solve the problem first.
If the honest answer is that the process needs the system rebuilt rather than one step automated, that is a bespoke survey system with capture on site.