Conflicting Accounts of an Incident

Bring the Accounts Together.

Tessa Reed fractures her wrist during an argument with supervisor Ben Calder. Her injury requires surgery. Westbridge appoints Leah to investigate the alleged push and prepare a finding for its conduct decision.

Leah adds both accounts, the incident entry and Tessa’s hospital document to nQuest. She links the accounts to one question: did contact cause the fall, or follow a loss of balance?

With nQuestKeep each account with its source, and connect it to the question you need to answer.

Working with supplied records and notes

A nQuest graph connects Tessa’s account, labeled “contact first,” and Ben’s response, labeled “loss of balance first,” to Leah’s question: “Contact before loss of balance?”

Read the initial record

Tessa Reed’s account

What It Says. Ben pushed her before she lost balance.

What Needs Checking. The sequence and who saw it.

Ben Calder’s account

What It Says. He reached to catch her as she lost balance.

What Needs Checking. What he saw before reaching out.

Initial incident entry

What It Says. Tessa slipped on the steps.

What Needs Checking. Where the duty manager got that description.

Hospital discharge document

What It Says. A wrist fracture requiring surgery.

What Needs Checking. Clinical findings and Tessa’s account of the injury.

Trace the Slip Report to Its Source.

The incident entry describes a slip. Leah asks nQuest’s AI, “What is the key disagreement?” She opens the answer’s references, then sets a task to establish where that description came from.

Leah interviews the duty manager and first aider, adds their records and asks why the notes differ. The answer traces the slip to Ben and the push allegation to Tessa. Neither responder witnessed the fall.

With nQuestFollow AI references into the records, then turn unanswered questions into assigned tasks.

Explore AI case answers

Leah asks nQuest where the accounts disagree. The answer compares Tessa’s allegation of a push with Ben’s account of attempted assistance, with references to the case records.

nQuest traces Martin’s description of a slip to Ben’s account and links to the supporting case records.

Check What the Witness Could See.

Ben names Amir Cole as being near the doorway. Amir tells Leah he saw contact and arm extension before Tessa’s backward step. Leah asks nQuest, “What did Amir actually see?” and opens his linked case record.

She connects the interview to her camera-review note and site checks, then puts the sequence to Ben. He maintains his explanation and challenges Amir’s view of Tessa’s feet.

With nQuestLink witness accounts to the checks behind them, and keep the response beside the evidence.

Explore connected records and notes

Leah asks, “What did Amir actually see?” nQuest describes contact and arm extension before Tessa’s backward step, alongside the gaps in Amir’s view.

A native nQuest view connects Amir, his interview, the camera review, site check and later site photograph to Leah’s observation checks. The camera relationship explicitly says it supports his route, not the contact.

Read the checks and responses

The corridor camera places Amir at the doorway but does not show the contact. Leah keeps her written review in nQuest; Westbridge retains the footage. Her site notes and later photographs record the sightline he described.

Amir saw the upper-body movement, but did not watch Tessa’s feet continuously or see her landing. Leah records those gaps and both participants’ follow-up responses with the interview.

Prepare the Finding and the Review.

Leah finds a push more likely than attempted assistance. Tessa’s account and Amir’s observations place contact first. She links her assessment to the supporting records and Ben’s response in nQuest.

The later medical report adds treatment and work-restriction details. Leah keeps it with the assessment and sets a task to review the findings and both parties’ responses with Olivia, Westbridge’s operations director.

For legal or insurance inquiries, Leah can retrieve the relevant accounts and medical evidence from the same case, then track further requests as tasks.

With nQuestBring the finding, evidence and next actions together for client, legal or insurance review.

Findings and reports

nQuest distinguishes what the medical evidence establishes about Tessa’s injury from the disputed cause of her fall.

A nQuest Todo card assigned to Leah: review the report handoff with Olivia, confirm she has both parties’ responses and record further questions.

Preparing for legal and insurance inquiries

For police or legal questions, start with the original accounts, witness checks and Ben’s response. Open the source behind each point and identify the custodian of any further records.

For an insurance inquiry, bring the incident chronology and medical report together. Track requests for policy, wage or loss records as tasks, with an owner and next action.

Agree what the reviewer needs and who can authorize sharing it. Check Tessa’s medical-consent scope before including her report.

A Serious Injury. Two Accounts of How It Happened.

Bring the Accounts Together.

Trace the Slip Report to Its Source.

Check What the Witness Could See.

Prepare the Finding and the Review.

Work Through a Case with Us.