Why Casebriar
Because a complaint answered badly costs more than the complaint.
Tenants increasingly quote the law in their complaints, sometimes accurately and sometimes not. The reply you send is what a redress scheme reads if it goes further. Casebriar makes sure that reply is built on the law as it's actually written, and on your own records.
The problem
Answering a complaint well is harder than it looks.
Most complaints aren't difficult because of one big question. They're difficult because of four small ones, each needing a different record, a different bit of law and a different answer.
One email, several issues
A complaint about heating is often also about damp, a delayed repair and a claim about rent. Answer them together and something gets missed.
Claims about the law
"You're legally required to…" might be exactly right, partly right or not in any legislation at all. Repeating a wrong claim is as risky as ignoring a right one.
A moving target
The Renters' Rights Act 2025 is changing how tenancies work in England. What was true when your templates were written may not be now.
What's different
Six reasons agencies are trying Casebriar.
It checks the legislation itself
Not a summary or a model's memory: the provision on legislation.gov.uk, with the section linked so you can read it yourself.
It never marks a tenant as wrong
If a claim can't be supported, Casebriar says it isn't established, and tells you not to repeat it as fact either way.
You make every decision
Nothing is drafted until you've decided each issue. Leave out any legal point you disagree with and it stays out.
Deadlines and escalation, right
Your procedure's dates in working days, and your internal review and redress scheme details taken from your settings, word for word.
Answers from your records
Each issue lists the records that matter. Your notes go into the reply as fact; anything unchecked is described as being looked into.
It sounds like you
Save a few past replies and every acknowledgement and reply uses your greeting, sign-off and tone.
Where the time goes
The work doesn't disappear. The searching does.
You still read the complaint, check your file and make the call. What goes is the part that eats the afternoon: working out what's being claimed and looking up the law.
| Step | By hand | With Casebriar |
|---|---|---|
| Work out the issues | Re-read the email, list the points yourself | Separated for you, grouped by type |
| Check legal claims | Search online, hope the source is current and English | Checked against legislation.gov.uk, section linked |
| Acknowledge | Find the template, count the working days | Dates worked out, letter ready to send |
| Gather evidence | Go through everything on file | A short checklist per issue; documents read for you |
| Write the reply | Start from a blank page or an old reply | Drafted from your decisions and notes, in your voice |
| Escalation details | Copy the scheme's details from somewhere | Added from your settings, exactly as you set them |
A new complaint is usually analysed in three to four minutes. You can get on with something else while it runs.
Compared
Why not just use a general AI chatbot?
It's a fair question. Chatbots are good at writing. They're not built to check what a complaint claims about English housing law.
| General chatbot | Casebriar | |
|---|---|---|
| Where the law comes from | ~Its training data, which may be out of date or not English law | ✓The provision fetched from legislation.gov.uk |
| Unsupported claims | ×May agree with the tenant, or invent a section | ✓Marked "not established", never repeated as fact |
| Your decisions | ~Writes a reply straight away | ✓Waits for your decision on each issue |
| Records and deadlines | ×Not part of it | ✓Checklists, working-day dates, your redress scheme |
| Tenant data | ~Depends on the product and your settings | ✓Only your agency sees it; erased on schedule |
Got a complaint waiting? Try Casebriar on that one.
Plans start at £15 a complaint, with no charge per user. Free pilot places are available while Casebriar is in early access.