The Claim Defensibility Test

A pilot that ends in a verdict, not a dashboard.

Connecting devices and watching records accumulate proves the software runs. It does not prove the thing you actually care about: whether, in a real dispute, this evidence would change the outcome. So the pilot is structured to answer exactly that question, and to have it answered by the person whose opinion counts, your own broker, adjuster, or counsel, not by us.

The ten steps

Sixty days at fixed scope, as a paid design-partner pilot: one line of business, one data source, up to 500 monitored assets. We help set up every step, including the hostile ones.

01
Pick one real workflow. A single cold-chain lane, one route, one facility. Not the whole operation.
02
Name three disputes you have actually had. A rejected load, a spoiled shipment, a custody argument. Real ones, with real money attached.
03
Map the decisive events. For each dispute, we identify the handful of events whose timing and custody would have decided it: gate-in, handoff, a temperature breach, a door open, a seal check, delivery.
04
Connect only those sources. Point the relevant sensors or platforms at Lumra over a webhook or the API. No new hardware, no rip-and-replace, and nothing connected that the disputes do not need.
05
Run a controlled incident. Trigger a real threshold breach or stage a custody handoff, so there is a genuine sealed record to examine rather than a hypothetical.
06
Generate a ProofPack. The sealed records, the incident assembly binding the sources together, the trust assessment, the independent timestamps, and the certification template, assembled into one file.
07
Attack it. Alter a value and watch verification fail. Verify the untouched pack offline with the free tool, with our servers blocked. The full adversarial script runs here.
08
Hand it to your own reviewer. Your broker, claims examiner, or outside counsel receives the pack, our published keys, and the verification instructions. They check it themselves, trusting neither you nor us.
09
Compare against your existing records. Put the ProofPack next to what your current systems would have produced for the same dispute, and ask which one the other side could more easily discount.
10
Get it in writing. A short written conclusion from that reviewer on whether the Lumra evidence would materially change how the dispute is handled. That memo is the deliverable.

How the pilot is scored

One question, answered by someone who is not us.

We do not count records signed. The pilot succeeds or fails on a single judgment from an independent claims, legal, or insurance professional:

"Would this evidence materially improve our ability to establish the incident timeline or custody window, and to accept, investigate, defend, or subrogate the claim?"

A yes is market validation, not just a working demo. A no tells us exactly what is missing, which is worth knowing early and cheaply.

What this proves, and what it does not. The test shows whether the evidence Lumra produces is verifiable, unaltered since sealing, correctly attributed by source strength (see the evidence levels), and useful to the people who settle disputes. It does not prove any court's ruling; admissibility is always the court's decision, and other objections still apply. We would rather your reviewer test that boundary in a pilot than take our word for it.

Why cold chain first

The test works best where the dispute is measurable, the custody question is sharp, and more than one party can be blamed. Cold-chain and multi-party logistics fit exactly: a temperature excursion is recorded, the decisive question is during whose custody it happened, several organizations can point at each other, the loss is real, and the telemetry already exists. Lumra verifies each vendor's own records and binds a reefer, a door sensor, a GPS tracker, and a shock logger into one incident that no single vendor could assemble alone. That is the multi-source incident we lead with. The same test structure applies to high-severity fleet claims and other high-liability operations.

Run the test.

Bring one workflow and three real disputes. We will map the decisive events, seal a controlled incident, and put the pack in front of your reviewer. Sixty days at fixed scope, and a written verdict at the end.

Start the test