The starting point
The contractor had spent months developing a general-purpose AI workflow for scopes and pricing. They wanted to find out whether Quotify could produce a useful construction estimate from architectural information.
A previously quoted fit-out project gave the team a known figure to compare against.
How Quotify was used
Existing and proposed drawing sets were tested in Quotify during the June pilot. The contractor reviewed the result alongside their own previously prepared quote.
On the call, the Quotify figure was read out as approximately £486,000. The contractor then stated that their quote to the client had been £456,750. They were encouraged by the result, while stressing the need to inspect the final specification in detail.
What came out of the review
The difference was approximately £29,250. Dividing that by the £456,750 prior quote gives about 6.4%, with Quotify’s result higher.
The pilot produced a promising basis for a more detailed scope and specification review. The call also identified a desire for reports tailored to different audiences.
About this result
One useful historical test, not a general accuracy rate
The comparator was a previous client quote, with the final scope and commercial allowances still to reconcile. Later feedback on a separate September project raised further pricing questions. The reported June result therefore applies to this historical comparison.
What another builder can take from it
Use a historical project as a calibration exercise. Compare the breakdown and specification as carefully as the total, then repeat the exercise on other projects before relying on a pattern.
A product example you can inspect
See the scope and pricing detail

Try this review on your own project
- Register the existing and proposed drawings and the specification revisions before comparing outputs.
- Check package scope, exclusions and commercial basis as carefully as the total.
- Review the internal cost detail and the client-facing scope separately, then reconcile their totals.
Customer evidence: 19 June 2026. Story reviewed 9 October 2026. Product examples are explained separately in the Academy.
