Use-case guide
Auditors and lenders ask for ledger data for different reasons and at different dates. Handing over a copy without stating what it covers is the most common cause of a second, more urgent request.
A requester wants ledger data they can rely on without checking it against the source themselves, which means they need the date it covers, the object groups and granularity it holds, and any known exceptions stated up front. State those three things in the handover itself, not in a follow-up email once they ask, and match the date boundary — as-at or period — to what they actually requested.
Who is asking
The two requests overlap in the data they touch and diverge in what they are checking it against.
Dates
Most rework on a handover traces back to this one ambiguity, not to missing data.
An as-at copy answers "what did the ledger show on this date." It is one dated run, and its value is that it does not move once handed over.
A period copy answers "what happened between these two dates." It is every dated run that falls inside the range, read together, and it is the shape an auditor needs to trace transactions rather than check a balance.
A request that says "year-end position" or "as at 30 June" wants the former. A request that says "for the year ended 30 June" or "for the quarter" wants the latter. Confirm which one before you assemble anything — the two are not interchangeable, and sending an as-at snapshot against a period request (or the reverse) reads as an incomplete or evasive handover even when nothing was withheld.
Detail level
The date boundary sets when; granularity sets how detailed. State both, because a recipient who expected one level and received another has to ask again before they can use what you sent.
| Level | What it holds, and who usually asks for it |
|---|---|
| Transaction level | Individual dated entries, as written to the copy. This is the level an auditor needs to trace a specific transaction back to its source document. |
| Account level | Balances rolled up by account, without the individual entries behind them. Sufficient for reconciling a trial balance or checking a covenant ratio, not for tracing a single item. |
| Report level | A summarised position — the shape a lender reviewing an as-at snapshot most often wants, and the fastest to review because nothing below the summary needs checking unless a figure does not tie out. |
The handover
Three lines, written into the handover itself, let the recipient rely on what you send without a follow-up call.
A dated run report already carries these fields — source, completion time, supported object groups, record counts, and exceptions — so the handover can point at the report itself as the artefact that states date and scope, rather than restating them by hand.
Gaps
This happens most often when a request arrives for a period before runs started, or before a scope change.
Do not assemble a copy that looks continuous when it is not. State which dated runs you can actually produce for the requested period, and name the gap directly: no runs before a given date, or a different object scope before a given date.
Where the request is for a period and you only hold as-at points inside it, offer those points as a documented alternative and say plainly that they are not a period reconstruction. A requester who knows the shape of what you can send can usually adapt their procedures to it. A requester who receives something that looks complete and later finds it is not has grounds to distrust everything else in the handover.
Copied ledger data is product data, and its retention is agreed per engagement during scoping — it does not follow the website's 24-month record-retention period. Whether a given period's runs still exist depends on what was agreed for your organisation, not on a fixed rule stated here.
Common questions
No. A run report records what a run copied: source, completion time, supported object groups, record counts and exceptions. It is not an opinion, an assurance engagement, or a certification, and it does not establish that the underlying transactions are accurate or complete. Treat it as the artefact that carries date and scope, and let the auditor or lender apply their own procedures to what it hands over.
Say so in the handover rather than assembling one. State the run dates you can produce, the object groups each one covers, and offer the closest as-at points either side of the period as a documented alternative. A requester who understands the gap can usually work with dated points; a requester who is handed something that looks like period data but is not built from period data cannot trust anything else you send them.
Only with the exceptions stated. If earlier runs are missing, incomplete, or predate a change in object scope, list that plainly next to the run dates you can support. A recipient who knows where the data thins out can decide whether what remains meets their need. A recipient who is not told finds out later, at a worse time.
The supported object groups for your organisation are confirmed in writing during scoping and restated on every run report, not asserted generally on this page.
LedgerCopy trial
A trial conversation establishes four things: the source platform you use, the ledger objects that matter to you, the cadence you need, and the review or continuity workflow the copy has to fit.