Start with one dated recommendation
Before an AC office reopens a deferred repair, check what happened after the recommendation was recorded. Another technician may have completed the work, an assessment may have changed the proposed scope, or the equipment may have been replaced. A reminder can remain on a list after the reason for it has changed.
In this fictional Florida example, Noah has recommendation R-17 against unit U-01. He originally requested a later discussion, but a separately authorized repair occurred before that date. The office needs to reconcile those records before preparing another estimate. Begin with R-17’s actual wording, original visit, equipment identity and any supporting evidence—not the shortened reminder title.
Build a timeline of intervening service
Read later events in date order and identify what each one establishes. A completed appointment or paid invoice alone does not prove that it addressed this specific recommendation.
| Date | Fictional record | What the office can establish |
|---|---|---|
| October 2 | Visit records R-17 for U-01 | A defined repair was recommended; approval was still pending |
| October 3 | Customer requests an October 20 discussion | There is a future conversation to review, not an approved repair |
| October 12 | Separately approved job J-74 is completed on U-01 | Later work occurred, but the completion note does not explicitly reference R-17 |
| October 19 | Office compares R-17 with J-74 | The scope relationship needs confirmation before another offer |
The office assigns the scope comparison to the qualified service reviewer. After checking the approved work and completion evidence, that reviewer confirms whether J-74 covered all of R-17. Until the match is supported, the office keeps the question open rather than guessing from similar job titles.
Assign one of four evidence-based review statuses
Use these four outcomes in a manual review worksheet alongside your service records. Your team compares the evidence and makes the scope decision.
| Status | Evidence needed | Owner and next decision |
|---|---|---|
| Still open | Review confirms the defined scope remains current and unperformed | Office owns the next scope or approval discussion |
| Completed | Later authorized work matches the scope and has completion evidence | Reviewer records the match; office closes the obsolete sales follow-up |
| Superseded | A later assessment or equipment change replaces the original recommendation | Reviewer identifies the successor record and explains what changed |
| Needs review | Records are missing, contradictory or insufficient to establish the match | Named reviewer resolves the specific evidence question |
For Noah, the reviewer confirms J-74 completed the entire R-17 scope. Record completed, the supporting job reference, reviewer and review date. Do not offer that same repair again merely because the October 20 reminder still exists.
Preserve the original record and explain partial completion
Keep the original recommendation as dated history. Add the reconciliation result and its supporting reference through the record process your team uses; do not rewrite the earlier finding to make it appear that the later repair had already happened.
If J-74 covered only part of R-17, identify the completed portion and the precise remainder. The remaining scope stays open only after review confirms it is still appropriate. If the unit was replaced instead, identify the replacement event and any successor recommendation. “Superseded” explains why the original action changed; it does not claim the old repair was performed. The job closeout evidence guide helps make future scope comparisons clearer.
Hand off only the decision that remains
Every unresolved row needs a named owner and a concrete question: confirm the scope match, obtain missing completion evidence or review the remaining work. The office should be able to explain why the item is waiting without asking the customer to reconstruct the history.
Once evidence is reconciled, use the customer follow-up eligibility guide for any appropriate outreach. Keep a new proposal limited to reviewed work that remains unapproved. If an older replacement proposal also needs new scope, pricing or validity, use the separate replacement-quote review.
Test record retrieval in IKOK
Bring fictional R-17 and J-74 records to a walkthrough. Ask to find the customer, the correct unit, both service events and the evidence needed to compare their scopes. Confirm where your team can record the review result and how another employee finds it.
If work remains, demonstrate preparing its reviewed proposal. The four-status sheet supplies the human decision process; software supports retrieving records and carrying the resulting work forward. A successful walkthrough ends with a supported explanation of what remains, not an automatically generated sales message.
