The same controller calls for several companies and asks about an engagement’s progress. Your receptionist identifies the entity, fiscal year and stage recorded by your team. Documents received, work reviewed and conclusions reserved for the CPA remain clearly distinguished in the conversation.
$49 CAD / month · 50 Standard calls · 1 local number
The record lands on the right entity and engagement: two items still outstanding, an owner now named for the batch, and a replaced version flagged along with the review status it invalidates. The earlier version is kept for traceability.
Wednesday, 2:30 p.m. The partner is in review. The finance director of a group of three companies calls about a batch of documents.
ReceptionistGood afternoon. Let me take your name and a callback number. To attach your call: which entity in the group, and which engagement?
CallerSophie Rivard, finance director. It is for the distribution subsidiary, the year-end review engagement.
ReceptionistThank you, Ms. Rivard. Before I tell you anything about this engagement, I need to verify your identity with the identifier agreed on with the firm.
CallerThe client code is 4471.
ReceptionistConfirmed. On that engagement, the current batch is still waiting on two items, and one open point has no owner named on your side. Who answers for that batch with you?
CallerMy controller does. And I am sending in a corrected version today of a schedule you already received.
ReceptionistRecorded, and it matters: a document replaced after validation drops the review status that depended on it, so nobody keeps working from the older version. I will say nothing about how the review itself is progressing — the partner comes back to you on that.
Audit or review. She records the entity, the financial year, the stage reported and the client owner of the current batch. Requests arrive grouped by batch rather than one at a time, and received, reviewed and accepted stay distinct statuses.
The same person calls about three related companies. She asks which entity is meant before anything else, and documents stay separate: nothing crosses from one entity to another merely because the caller is the same.
« Where is our file at? ». She verifies identity, reads back the stage your team updated, and keeps received apart from reviewed. Task progress is one thing; a file actually reviewed is another.
A reorganisation, an acquisition, a structure question. She records the entity, the subject, the deadline reported and who is asking, then offers a meeting in your windows. The advice itself starts when you pick up the line.
An officer calls about a client of the firm. She discloses nothing: she records the name, badge number, file number and callback window, and the call goes straight to the responsible CPA.
What she takes on between an entity, an engagement and an open point with no owner, a tax letter and an officer on the line, then the line she does not cross. Every line is a call your firm gets.
She identifies the entity and the engagement concerned ahead of the request itself, even when the same person calls about several related companies.
A group of three companies does not turn into three mixed-up conversations: each document stays under its own entity.
She records the client-side owner of the current document batch, before discussing what is in that batch.
An open point with no owner stands out as such rather than staying an unwritten ambiguity.
On a status question, she reads back the stage your team updated and keeps received apart from reviewed.
Task progress is not confused with a file the partner has actually reviewed.
For a tax letter, she captures the authority, the type of notice and the deadline stated, without interpreting its content.
She states plainly that nothing should be answered before speaking with the CPA, and asks for the letter itself over the secure channel.
When a CRA or Revenu Québec officer calls about a client of the firm, she discloses nothing and captures their name, badge number and file number before passing the call on.
The responsible CPA gets the call as a priority, with the callback window the officer asked for.
A filing or remittance deadline reported under ten days away triggers an immediate alert to the CPA, business day or not.
The priority line exists precisely for these situations, distinct from an ordinary next-day callback.
She says honestly when the firm is not taking new files at the height of the season, and offers the waiting list instead of a false promise.
A refusal stated plainly beats a booked meeting nobody will honour.
She books the meeting into your open windows, with confirmation and a reminder before the date.
An individual meeting and a business meeting do not take the same length; she respects the one you configured.
Engagements that come round each financial year find their entities, their batches and their owners again, with open questions and an end-of-period report.
An annual cycle does not start from zero: last year’s structure reappears to be updated. Recurring engagements
A document’s filing and extraction are proposed for review, and a document replaced after validation invalidates the review status that depended on it.
Nobody works by mistake off an outdated version, because the change is flagged instead of slipping by unnoticed. Preparation and coordination
Rights and requests separate by entity and by office, with a consolidated view of the workload that keeps the files themselves apart.
A second office joins the firm without anyone seeing what falls outside their scope. Multi-site and entities
With Karbon, clients and work items are exposed through the vendor’s interface, but document operations still have to be proven before being presented as active.
Account-level scope calls for careful internal filtering that no authenticated trial has validated yet. Karbon
With ProNotaire, JurisConcept and comparable engagement platforms, the need for batches and review statuses is documented, without any external interface having been demonstrated.
A need documented at large firms is not presented as proof of access. ProNotaire and JurisConcept
She answers from the calls and records of your firm you are allowed to access. A question about an option only applies once you have switched it on.
The questionWhich entity and engagement was this call attached to?
She retrieves the entity, the engagement and the owner named. She does not merge two entities in the same group.
Which open points still have no owner named?
She reads open points mentioned and who answers for them, where that was captured. She does not assign an owner herself.
Which tax letters are still waiting on a callback from the CPA?
She reads requests flagged priority and tied to a notice. She does not interpret the letter’s content.
Which recurring engagements have an open question this period?
Add-onWith Recurring engagements: the cycles, batches and open questions per entity. Without the option, each engagement starts from a blank file.
Your entities and how they relate, the kinds of engagement, internal and client owners, request batches per engagement, and what the receptionist may not assert. You can change all of it at any time from the app.
Name and callback number, then the entity and the engagement concerned. After that: the subject, the document batch in question, the client owner, any open points mentioned and the internal deadline reported.
The record lands on the right entity, the right engagement and the right owner. An open point with no owner stands out as such. The meeting is booked into your windows with confirmation and reminder, and review stays entirely with you.
A receptionist who answers for you in both languages, attaches every call to its entity and engagement, and sends you a written record. No setup fee, and you keep your number.
She does not declare that a file meets a standard: that sentence belongs to whoever signs it.
This is included in your base plan. She answers using the calls, requests and business information you are allowed to access.
Talk to your receptionistA question you can ask
Which entity and fiscal year is this controller asking about?
She reads the entity and stage recorded by your team. The responsible professional at the practice decides when the engagement review is complete.
Beyond the base plan. Each one is added on purpose, separately from the base. None is switched on unless you choose it.
You can add a channel so she can continue the conversation with your customers. Any action she takes follows the same rules and the options you have chosen.
Optional customer channel
Attach emails to the entity and engagement; document preparation and review retain their separate permissions.
The transactional messages provided by your base plan and your own questions to the receptionist remain included.
Check the actions supported, connection requirements and how to work when your software cannot perform the requested action.
Clients, work items and collaboration are exposed by the vendor's interface. Document operations still have to be proven, account-level scope calls for careful internal filtering, and no authenticated trial has been run yet.
The need — request batches, rights by entity, review statuses — is documented at large firms, but no external interface has been demonstrated. A documented need is no proof of access.
A firm running assurance and advisory engagements for groups of several entities spends a real share of its time untangling logistics: which batch of documents belongs to which entity, who on the client side answers for that batch, which points are still open, and which version of the deliverable the partner actually reviewed.
Your receptionist works on that layer. She answers in French or in English, identifies the entity and the engagement ahead of the request itself, records the client-side owner, and attaches the call to the right file rather than to the right surname. A group of three companies does not turn into three mixed-up conversations.
She touches nothing that belongs to professional judgement. Accepting the engagement, independence, review, conclusions and signature stay with the partner — and she refrains from saying a file meets a standard, because that sentence belongs only to whoever signs it.
The other lines of work in this section run on the same engine, with their own requests and their own rules.
Legal & accountingNo, and it is the strictest limit on this page. A conclusion of that kind belongs to the CPA who signs it, with their judgement and their independence. The receptionist reads back a stage your team updated, and nothing more.
She asks for the entity before the subject of the call, and documents stay separate even when the contact is the same person. With the Multi-site & entities option, rights and requests separate on the administration side too, so nobody sees what is outside their scope.
The review status that depended on it is invalidated and the owner is notified, while the earlier version is kept. That is the documented failure case for this trade, and the default behaviour comes straight from it.
Only if you add Preparation & coordination, and even then filing and extraction are proposed for review rather than applied. Evidence items, review and conclusions stay in your hands.
She discloses nothing. She records the officer's name, badge number, file number and callback window, and the call goes straight to the responsible CPA. That is what the priority line exists for.
Yes, with the Email option: the thread is attached to the authorized entity and engagement, with a reply prepared under your rules. Detailed document and version handling belongs to Preparation and coordination. The email inbox does not grant access to unauthorized records.
Start your free trial with your email. Your website can help prepare your business information, but it is optional. Confirm the facts, choose a first task and test your receptionist. You can try options too, starting with the ones you need.
Keep my phone numberCPA firms
