Why advisers are asking about ChatGPT
Trade press and vendor blogs already warn that “free report software” is not the same as a firm-owned workflow. Advisers land on those articles because they want speed without retyping the same case into Word again.
Our job here is narrower. We file three different things people confuse, then show where a constructor sits — not another chatbot with a UK postcode.
What ChatGPT is (and is not) for a COBS file
Consumer ChatGPT is a general chat product. It is not a suitability-report constructor, not your firm’s system of record, and not an audit trail of who changed what and when.
Pasting a fact-find, recommendation, or client identifiers into a consumer model is the data-handling risk firms already discuss with compliance. We are not the regulator and we do not claim ChatGPT is “banned” or that every such file will fail review. Even a careful prompt still does not give you a structured COBS 9 report with firm-owned evidence of how the draft was built.
For how we host and control access, see Security and Privacy. For the substance of what a suitability report is meant to demonstrate — objectives, financial situation, knowledge and experience, risk, capacity for loss — start from our Resources hub rather than from a chat window.
Three products people confuse
| Bucket | What it actually does | Examples in this conversation |
|---|---|---|
| A. Paste into ChatGPT | General model; no firm workflow | The query itself |
| B. AI that writes the regulated report (often into the firm’s Word template) | Drafts the suitability report | AdvisoryAI Emma (~£269–299), Marloo Pro (£349), PlanAI (£150), Ammonite (£150/user, min. 3), Automwrite, Templi (demo-gated), AutoAdvise (£150), Afternoon (£5/family) |
| C. Constructor + optional suggest-only AI | Hardcoded report; AI cannot write it | ProSuitability |
This page exists so you can file us in C, not B. We name the B tools once, with public list prices only, for contrast. We do not invent their claims, and we are not “a cheaper Emma”.
For how ProSuitability compares with named suitability report tools, see How ProSuitability differs.
What ProSuitability actually is
ProSuitability is suitability-report constructor software for authors who already know compliance and want speed.
Bring in the case. Generate a structured first draft from fact-find and recommendation. Review and export. It works standalone — no practice management system integration required. Output is styled as a report (indexed table of contents), not a letter; a short statement of needs and demands is extra work on top, not a substitute for the report.
Public site language you can rely on: fast, consistent, personalised; lower cost in the sense of less adviser and paraplanner retyping. We do not invent a percentage time-save. About the firm: built by people who know the report.
We are not positioning as an ATEB-style compliance-director platform, nor as a like-for-like swap for wizard/block-builder incumbents. If you want AI to author the regulated report into your Word template, the B-bucket tools above are the honest category — not us.
What Virtual Paraplanner is (and is not)
Virtual Paraplanner is an optional, suggest-only companion. After recommendations (and ideally a suitability draft), a short consult that behaves like talking to a paraplanner produces an editable Needs & Demands draft.
The Report Constructor and the suitability report stay hardcoded and unchanged. AI wording is for adviser review only. It does not invent client speech you have not confirmed, and it does not write into Constructor fields.
Sharing clipped case material with optional Grok AI is opt-in per review. There is a built-in path to continue without sharing. The firm remains controller; advisers submit only what they are entitled to disclose. Optional upload of readable notes can refine questions — not auto-author the regulated report.
VP is included in every trial. After trial it is £3 per billed adviser / month + VAT, or stay on core only.