Tamar Crossing Freight

Tamar Crossing Freight has two Starter proposals and no executed order form: a draft of 2 Sep 2026 and a final-stored proposal of 7 Sep 2026, both quoting £28k for Year 1. The two disagree on go-live timing, refresh time zone and support response.

Executed: No document for Tamar Crossing Freight is stored as executed, so there are no contracted price, dates or service levels. The 7 Sep 2026 proposal says the order form and MSA would carry the binding terms.

Open items: The Proposal v1 draft of 2 Sep 2026 from Sophie Ling quotes £28k for year one and £22k a year from year two. The Proposal of 7 Sep 2026, stored as final, quotes implementation £6,000 and a Year 1 subscription of £22k, total £28k, paid in full, in advance.

Open items: Both are offers, not contracts. The draft's order form target date has passed, and neither record shows a reply or a signature.

Contradictions:

• Go-live: the draft says eight weeks after kickoff; the 7 Sep 2026 proposal says within 4 weeks of agreement.
• Refresh: the draft says by 07:00 UK time; the 7 Sep 2026 proposal says 07:00 your local time.
• Support: the draft offers a four-hour first response; the 7 Sep 2026 proposal states no P1 response time.
• Renewal: the draft renews 12 months from go-live; the 7 Sep 2026 proposal renews at the current list price, with no cap.

Contradictions: The 2 Sep 2026 draft also conflicts with itself, with a four-week programme but go-live eight weeks after kickoff. If the customer relies on the draft, these differences need settling in the order form.

Commitments: None are live, because nothing is executed. Neither proposal states an availability figure or service credits.

Gaps: Both documents were read, so this roll-up covers every document held. The records show no customer contact, no signature and no start or end date.

AI · claude-opus-5-5 · as at Fri 9 Oct 2026