How to Read a Gumshoe Verification Report: A Field Guide to the Results

Your first Gumshoe verification report returns in a few seconds and contains more information than most supplier due diligence processes produce in an hour. The tile layout is designed to be scanned quickly — but understanding what each result actually represents takes a little more than a scan.

This is a field guide to the report. What each status means, what to action, what to file, and what the overall risk score is actually measuring.

The Status Labels

PASS means the check ran, found data, and the result is affirmatively good. The supplier cleared this particular register, lookup, or assessment. A PASS is a finding — not a default state.

WARN means the check found something worth noting but not conclusive. Common WARN situations: a domain registered less than 180 days ago (new businesses can be entirely legitimate), an ABN registered less than three months ago for a company (not uncommon for new contractors, worth noting for large first invoices), a business name that expired and was recently renewed (a compliance gap, not fraud).

FAIL means the check found a negative result that warrants attention. A FAIL on insolvency means the entity or a connected entity appears in the external administration register. A FAIL on banned persons means a director appears on the ASIC disqualification list. A FAIL on ABN status means the ABN is cancelled or has never been active.

NA means the check is not applicable to this entity. A sole trader returns NA on company-specific ASIC checks. An entity with no resolvable website returns NA on WHOIS, email security, and web presence checks. NA is informational — it tells you the check ran, assessed the entity type, and determined it does not apply. It is not a problem.

The Two-Round Return

Gumshoe results arrive in two rounds. The first round — fast checks — returns within a few seconds and covers the ABR data, ASIC company status, business name registration, and domain and email lookups. These checks are answered with a direct database query or a DNS lookup.

The second round — deep checks — takes 15–30 seconds and covers cross-referencing against the insolvency gazette, the banned persons register, financial licences, trade licences, adverse records, and charity registration. These involve more complex lookups across larger datasets.

You can read and act on the first-round results while the second round is still running. The overall risk score updates when the full picture is in.

The Risk Score

The overall risk score is a weighted composite across all checks. It is not a simple count of PASS and FAIL results — the weights reflect the severity of each check. An insolvency FAIL counts for more than a web presence WARN. A banned director FAIL counts for more than a short domain registration age.

As a practical guide to the score ranges:

• 0–20: Clean. All or nearly all checks passed. File the result and proceed.
• 21–40: Low risk. One or two minor WARN results, no FAILs. Note the WARNs and continue with standard payment terms.
• 41–60: Moderate. Multiple WARNs or one FAIL. Consider a manual review before first payment, or ask the supplier to address the flagged items.
• 61–80: High. Significant flags present. Recommend manual review, references, or a conditional first engagement before extending terms.
• 81–100: Critical. Active FAILs on high-weight checks (insolvency, banned persons, cancelled ABN). Consult legal or financial advice before proceeding.

Expanding the Tiles

Each tile is expandable. Clicking a tile shows the underlying data that produced the result — not just the status, but the specific register entries, field values, and data sources. For a FAIL or WARN, the expanded view shows what was found and, where available, a link to the source register.

This expanded data is what belongs in your audit record. If the report is later reviewed in a dispute or fraud investigation, the tile detail shows that the check was substantive — not just that a box was ticked.

What to Do With the Report

A clean report (score below 40, no FAILs): save the PDF or screenshot, note the date and ABN, file it against the supplier record in your AP system. Done.

A report with WARNs: note which checks triggered and why. For most WARNs — short domain age, recent ABN registration, minor business name issues — you are making a judgement call about whether the context explains them. Document that judgement in the supplier file alongside the report.

A report with FAILs: stop and review before processing any payments. Expand the relevant tiles to see the underlying data. If the FAIL is on insolvency or banned persons, seek advice before proceeding. If the FAIL is on ABN status, do not process the invoice until the ABN situation is resolved — your withholding obligations as a payer may be engaged.

The report takes a few seconds to generate. The decision-making it supports may take longer — but it should be an informed decision, with documented evidence, not a guess based on a supplier's word.

Uncommon Insights

One of the lesser-known implications of a FAIL status on the ASIC disqualification list is that it may trigger a breach of section 206B of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), which prohibits a disqualified person from managing a corporation. In such cases, the CFO or accountant may need to report the breach to ASIC and take steps to rectify the situation, including potentially terminating the contract with the supplier.

While a WARN status on the ABN registration age may not necessarily be a cause for concern, it is essential to note that the ATO's guidelines on GST registration require businesses to register for GST within 21 days of exceeding the $75,000 turnover threshold. A WARN status on ABN age may indicate that the supplier has not yet registered for GST, which could lead to penalties and fines under the Taxation Administration Act 1953 (Cth). It is crucial to review the supplier's GST registration status and ensure compliance with ATO requirements.

The risk score range of 0-100, with lower scores indicating lower risk, may seem counterintuitive to some users. However, it is essential to note that the risk score is not a linear measure of risk but rather a weighted combination of signals. A single FAIL status may not necessarily result in a high risk score if the other checks return PASS or WARN statuses. Conversely, multiple WARN statuses may contribute to a higher risk score than a single FAIL status, depending on the specific checks and the supplier's overall risk profile.

ASIC's enforcement patterns suggest that the regulator is increasingly focusing on compliance with the anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing (AML/CTF) provisions of the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Act 2006 (Cth). In this context, a FAIL status on the financial licences check may indicate that the supplier is not compliant with AML/CTF requirements, which could lead to significant penalties and reputational damage. CFOs and accountants should carefully review the supplier's AML/CTF compliance and take steps to mitigate any potential risks.