Review each CAM draft claim
A tool-made letter is still a draft.
This original claim row uses ABA rule models.
It also uses a nearby review plan.
Neither source creates a CAM ethics rule.
Counsel must check every claim before any client sends it.
Use three review states: approve, revise, or remove.
The attorney growth pillar places draft review after cited findings.
The Practice Growth hub maps other firm review paths.
The attorney page shows who controls legal advice.
Confirm who can approve
Confirm the client before reviewing words.
Check conflicts under the firm's own rules. Confirm who approved the task.
Then confirm the recipient. Check the notice clause and stated address.
Do not infer approval from an old email. Save the proof.
Use the client-file steps for this gate.
Stop when approval power is unclear. Do not keep editing the letter.
Build a claim review row
Review one claim at a time.
Place the draft words beside the evidence. Add the lawyer's choice.
Use this original protocol:
| Field | Review question |
|---|---|
| Authority | Did the client approve this request? |
| Recipient | Is this the approved person and address? |
| Lease cite | Does the clause support the statement? |
| Statement cite | Does the billed line match the claim? |
| Math | Can counsel repeat the calculation? |
| Action | Did the client approve the requested step? |
| Qualifier | Does the wording match known facts? |
| Attachments | Are all cited files attached? |
| Tone | Does counsel approve the message? |
| Confidentiality | Did counsel check privilege and private client data? |
| Local law | Did a lawyer review legal conclusions? |
| State | Approve, revise, or remove |
Do not approve a row with a blank source. Unknown facts need clear labels.
The firm sets its privilege and client-data rules.
Use three review states
Each state needs a written reason.
Approve
The claim matches the cited clause and statement line.
Counsel can repeat the math. The request matches client approval.
Counsel approves the wording, tone, and local-law treatment.
Revise
The core fact has support. The wording goes beyond that support.
Narrow the words. Add the missing qualifier or change the request.
Counsel reviews the new version again.
Remove
The claim lacks support. It may exceed client approval.
Delete it from the outgoing draft. Record the reason in the file.
Keep removed text out of client comments.
Stop the send steps
Some defects stop the whole draft. Do not route around them.
Stop sending for these issues:
- An unresolved conflict
- Unclear client authority
- An unapproved recipient
- An unsupported factual claim
- Math counsel cannot repeat
- A missing governing lease file
- An open legal conclusion
- A privilege concern
- Missing jurisdiction review
The responsible attorney decides when the hold clears.
The legal intake filter can route wider issues.
Review three sample claims
This sample is fictional. It is not a client letter.
Approve one claim
Draft claim: "The statement applies a five percent admin fee."
The statement line shows five percent. The draft cites that page.
The sentence states a document fact. It makes no legal conclusion.
Review state: approve, subject to counsel's full letter review.
Revise one claim
Draft claim: "The fee clearly breaches the lease."
The file has a cited fee cap. Yet that wording states a conclusion.
Replace it with a supported request:
Please explain how this fee matches the lease cap.
Review state: revise. Counsel checks the final legal framing.
Remove one claim
Draft claim: "The landlord hid backup records from the client."
The file only shows that backup is missing. It proves no intent.
Review state: remove. Ask for the named records instead.
No sample predicts a legal result. No sample promises recovery.
Check lawyer duties
Lawyer duties differ across states.
The ABA Model Rules are models. Most states use them as a base.
State rules still control. Counsel must check the current local rules.
An ABA article discusses tools and value billing. It says tools may shift work toward checking.
That article sets no CAM review rule. It proves no firm result.
Bloomberg Law describes a document review plan. That is only a nearby work example.
It does not create a CAM ethics standard.
Save the review record
Keep the draft, evidence rows, and final state together.
Save each lawyer change. Keep the approved recipient and attachments.
Record the final send choice. Record who made that choice.
Do not treat an old approval as standing permission.
The flat-fee scope guide can define this review task.
Browse the attorney resource hub for more controls.
Where CAMAudit fits
Use the revised fee claim from this guide.
CAMAudit places the fee line beside its lease cap.
Fixed rules run the math. Counsel changes the legal wording.
The tenant attorney marks that claim as revised. Counsel approves the final words.
The tool builds a branded CAM audit. The attorney reviews and signs it.
CAMAudit may prepare a dispute letter draft here.
It uses that reviewed finding.
Counsel checks every claim. Counsel controls advice and the send choice.
It is a draft for your review, not legal advice.
Have counsel review it before sending.
Use the service line guide to set boundaries.