A proposal built for how practices actually agree the work
FigsFlow is proposal software for UK accountancy practices — services, pricing, engagement letters and e-signature on the same client record your compliance and delivery work already run on. Select the services, the fee calculates from your own price list, and the letters issue themselves per entity.
The wording is yours and the judgement is yours. FigsFlow assembles, prices and evidences. It does not set your fee, sign off your clauses, or file anything.
Partner or principal, start with the two views in the tour below. Risk or compliance, go straight to the clause library and what we do not claim.
Built inside working practices — UK Property Accountants and Sterling Wells Microsoft 365 native — your documents stay in your tenant Clause library aligned to the bodies you answer to
- Services5 selected · from your library
- Fee£6,210 · from your price list
- WordingYour approved clause set
- Letters3 issued · company + 2 directors
- On signatureCDD opened · jobs created
delivery starts on this record — nothing retyped
The same proposal, seen two different ways
A partner opens FigsFlow and sees the practitioner's side — services, schedules, weightings, the fee and which entities need a letter. The client opens the same proposal and sees one screen in plain English: what you are doing for them, what it costs, and one button. Switch between the two, then change the services and watch both sides move together.
Each service brings its own schedule wording and its own fee rule. Add one and the proposal, the fee and the engagement letters are all re-scoped from the same approved set.
Your service library
Scope and schedule wording written once per service, then reused on every proposal that includes it.
Pricing that calculates
The fee comes from the rules your practice configured, not from what someone remembered charging last year.
Letters per entity
One proposal produces a separate engagement letter for each company and each individual that needs one.
Two languages, one record
Practitioner terms in the app, plain English on the client surface. The same proposal, never retyped.
Nobody planned the retyping. It happens because the documents are separate.
It is Thursday. A prospect said yes on the phone on Monday. Somebody opens last year's closest engagement letter, saves a copy, renames it, cuts the clauses that do not apply, and pastes in a fee from a pricing spreadsheet that two people maintain differently. The letter goes out. It comes back signed into an inbox. Then someone keys the company and both directors into the AML check, and someone else creates the jobs.
The retyping is not the problem. It is the symptom. The problem is that each document is a separate artefact — so the scope, the fee and the client details have to be re-stated at every step, and every re-statement is a chance for them to stop agreeing with each other.
Retyped by hand · services and fee copied into the quote
Retyped by hand · scope copied into the engagement letter, then chased
Retyped by hand · client and entities keyed into the AML check
Three seams. And every seam is a place where something true stops being true.
One record, from first enquiry to the work itself
This is what makes it part of a practice management platform rather than a document generator with an accountancy logo on it. The enquiry, the price, the signature, the due diligence and the job are five stages of one record — so the seams in the last fold are not shortened, they are gone.
An enquiry arrives
Web form, phone call or referral. The contact and the opportunity are created together, with the source stamped on both.
CRM and pipeline →Nothing rekeyed
Scoped and priced
Services come off your library. The fee calculates from the rules your practice set up, so the number on the proposal is not a number somebody typed.
Nothing rekeyed
Proposed and signed You are here
The proposal assembles from the approved clause set, the client reads it in plain English, and the signature is the event that closes it — not somebody marking it won by hand.
Nothing rekeyed
Onboarding and compliance
Signature opens due diligence on the entities the letter actually named, so the CDD file starts from the engagement rather than from a retyped list.
AML and client due diligence →Nothing rekeyed
Delivery picks it up
Jobs create themselves from the agreed services, and the statutory dates for those services land on the client's calendar.
HMRC deadlines →What feeds the proposal
- Companies House — the entity, directors and PSC data, so the letter is issued in the legal name held at the register
- Your service library — scope and schedule wording written once, per service
- Your price list — the rules that turn a scope into a fee
- Your approved clause set — signed off at practice level, clause by clause
What the proposal feeds
- Due diligence — CDD opens on the entities and people the letter named
- The jobs — recurring work created from the services that were agreed
- The deadline calendar — statutory dates for exactly the services you took on
- The invoice — the fee the client accepted, carried forward rather than re-agreed
Does a sole trader get the same paperwork as a family group?
No, and this is the part that costs UK practices the most time. A proposal covering a company, its two directors and a spouse is one commercial conversation but several engagements — and each party needs their own letter. FigsFlow issues one proposal and the letters the structure actually requires.
Who needs a separate letter is a matter of professional judgement and your practice's own policy. FigsFlow issues what you configure; it does not decide the structure for you.
The fee that never reconciles
Winning the work is one side. Doing the work is the other. They are supposed to meet on one client record — and in most practices they do not, so somebody clears the difference by hand every time a letter comes back signed. Judge proposal software on that gap rather than on how the document looks. The question is not how many templates it ships. It is whether the fee that was actually agreed, the scope that was actually promised and the version the client actually signed are still readable in eighteen months, when a claim or a supervision visit asks.
Good-looking proposals and a workable fee. But due diligence sits outside it, nothing becomes a job, and the client record starts again in whatever runs delivery. Difference: the compliance and delivery side.
It captures the signature reliably, and that is genuinely useful. It has no view of what was scoped, what it should cost, or what is supposed to happen next. Difference: everything either side of the signature.
Free until volume. Every letter starts from last year's closest file, the master set forks the first time someone edits a client copy, and there is no answer to which version was signed. Difference: all of it, plus the audit trail.
The scoped services become the letter, the fee, the due diligence file and the jobs, on one client record. The signature is an event, not a status somebody remembers to change. Difference: nil.
We contrast at the category level and never publish a claim about a named competitor.
Reconciling item 01
The fee that was actually agreed
The quoted fee, the fee the partner conceded on the call, and the fee that reaches the invoice are three different numbers in most practices — and only the first one is written down anywhere.
Frozen against the engagement on acceptance
Reconciling item 02
What the scope actually said
In September the work has grown. Somebody has to decide whether that was in scope, from a document nobody has opened since April, and usually decides not to raise it.
Re-scoped as a signed variation, not a memory
Reconciling item 03
Which wording they signed
Two years later, on a claim or a supervision visit, the question is which version of the terms governed the work in March. A folder of Word files cannot answer it.
Every version retained, dated and attributed
Whose wording goes in the letter?
Yours. FigsFlow ships pre-drafted engagement letter templates aligned to the requirements of the professional bodies a UK practice answers to — ICAEW, ACCA, AAT, CIOT, ATT and CIMA — and every clause is editable. Adopt the set as drafted, rewrite what you disagree with, or replace a clause with wording your practice already uses.
That is a statement about the clause library, and nothing more. The professional bodies do not endorse, approve or accredit FigsFlow, and we do not claim they do. Approval is what makes the set yours, not who drafted it first.
Ask on a demo call about anything not listed here. Capability and regulatory statements should be re-verified and date-stamped before release.
Short list, honestly labelled
What the proposal actually connects to today, and what it does not. Finding that out in month two is worse than reading it now.
Live today
What it plugs into, and what that buys you
Microsoft 365
Documents stay in your own SharePoint and client mail stays in Outlook, synced against the proposal rather than displaced. Sign in with the identity your practice already administers.
Companies House and the Irish CRO
Search the company once and the registered name, directors and PSC data land on the record before a word of the proposal is drafted — so the letter is issued in the name held at the register.
The enquiry form on your website
A submission creates the contact and the opportunity together and stamps the source, with no one rekeying it — which is where most practices' leads already arrive.
Not in this release
And we would rather say so
Filing or submitting anything
The proposal and the letter are agreements, not returns. Statutory filing stays with your tax, ledger and filing software, and FigsFlow does not submit on your behalf.
A fee recommendation engine
There is no benchmarking that tells you what to charge. FigsFlow applies the pricing rules you set up, and the commercial judgement stays with the practice.
Free-form document design
You control branding, colours, fonts and the service content. You do not get an open page-layout canvas, because a letter that can be laid out any way is a letter nobody can review at scale.
Bulk marketing email
Proposal and letter email is transactional and goes to the parties on the engagement. Campaign sending is not part of this module.
Where the proposal connects
CRM and pipeline
Where the enquiry becomes an opportunity, before anything is scoped or priced.
See CRM and pipeline →Onboarding suite
What signature starts — scoped, priced, evidenced, before the work does.
See onboarding →AML and client due diligence
Checks that run inside the engagement flow rather than as a detour outside it.
See AML and CDD →Audit trail and evidence
What the letter contained, who changed it and when — kept, not overwritten.
See the audit trail →Bring an engagement you are scoping this week
Thirty minutes, your services, your entity structure and the fee from your own price list — and the clauses you would want to change. A practice specialist builds the letter on screen while you watch.
Once the letter is signed, the scope it carries becomes the due diligence file and the jobs. The onboarding suite