Evidence continuity for obligations and records
When an audit, an insurance inquiry, or a dispute comes up, you need to traceably show what was documented when.
PflichtPilot documents obligations as traceable documentation chains — for operator obligations, inspections, and maintenance.
Structurally prepared when evidence is required — for audits, disputes, insurance, and authorities.
PflichtPilot is in an early adoption phase. Companies can use the live system and contribute feedback.
The problem
At the start, documentation is clean — because acceptance pressure exists.
During ongoing operations it decays over the years: files spread out, responsibilities shift, records become unfindable.
When it gets serious — audit, client, insurance, authorities, or dispute — “we do that” doesn’t count.
What counts: Can you document it — over time?
The difference
They don’t enforce continuity.
Typical breaks
Obligations chronologically documented — over years.
How it works
PflichtPilot doesn’t solve storage.
PflichtPilot creates traceability over time.
Evidence logic
Title, risk, due date — done.
PDF, photo, or screenshot — with upload time.
Chronologically documented — exportable as a structured package.
The approach
PflichtPilot treats documentation as an evidence problem — not a storage problem.
Not the document. Not the folder.
Everything relevant stays with the obligation.
Recurring obligations form a readable chain over time.
What has been closed — and whether it’s documented — stays visible.
A defensible state — based on what is actually there.
A structured package instead of last-minute searching.
No reminders
No task lists. No automatic obligation generation.
Instead
Documentation chains, records management, archived iterations.
Who it’s for
Operators and SMEs with inspection and maintenance obligations
Service providers with documentation obligations toward clients
Responsible parties for whom documentation is decisive when evidence is required
Use cases
Date, record, assignment — ready at a click.
From case law
Four examples from German case law and practice illustrating how organised records can become relevant in disputes or authority inquiries.
LG Frankfurt a.M., judgment of 28 May 2025 – 2-01 S 68/24
After a roof tile fell, the court held the property manager liable. In an ordinary storm an Anscheinsbeweis (prima-facie inference) suggested faulty construction or maintenance; mere visual inspections by lay staff did not suffice.
Regular checks, maintenance, and their traceability can become decisive in a dispute.
BGH, judgment of 25 Oct 2022 – VI ZR 1283/20
For hazards arising from the organisational sphere of a department store, the operator must be able to demonstrate and prove that appropriate cleaning and inspection measures were observed.
Documented inspection routines can become procedurally relevant in a dispute.
DGUV Regulation 3 — electrical installations and equipment
Companies must keep electrical installations and equipment in proper condition and have them inspected at recurring intervals. After an incident the question regularly arises whether inspections, remediation, and approvals were traceably documented.
A structured documentation file can help to present existing inspection protocols and maintenance records in an organised way.
BGH, judgment of 6 May 2015 – VIII ZR 161/14
The BGH addressed the landlord's inspection and safety duties regarding legionella in drinking water. It also emphasised that the concrete cause of infection has to be fully proven in proceedings.
Especially for long-term operator duties, maintenance, inspection, and control records can become significant in a dispute.
Note: The cases serve to illustrate typical evidence situations in general terms. They do not concern PflichtPilot and do not constitute legal advice. Whether documentation suffices in an individual case depends on the scope of duty, the facts, and judicial evaluation of evidence.
Behind PflichtPilot
Glossary
Legal or contractual obligations to maintain, inspect, or document equipment, buildings, or services.
Records when maintenance or inspections were performed and which records exist.
Document that required checks were performed — as traceable evidence.
Obligations and their records stay chronologically traceable over long periods of time.
Common questions
PflichtPilot is an evidence continuity system. Obligations are documented as traceable documentation chains — with records, archiving, and chronological structure over time.
No. PflichtPilot is neither a task manager, reminder system, nor calendar. The focus is on traceable documentation of obligations with records and archiving over time — not on remembering or completing tasks.
Folders store files — they don’t enforce continuity. PflichtPilot structures obligations as chronological documentation chains. Over time a traceable chain forms that can be presented in a structured way when evidence is required.
Archiving doesn’t mean deleting — the obligation and its record stay part of the documentation chain. When an obligation is archived, a new obligation can be generated automatically with the next due date. The new due date is derived from the previous one. Archiving is the only trigger for follow-up iterations — no background processes.
You can also archive obligations without a record — the system clearly marks the archive entry as “no record” and counts these transparently. Gaps stay visible, not hidden.
Data is hosted in the EU (Supabase). Data export is available at any time. No data is shared with third parties.
Create an account and structure obligations, iterations and archive for free. Uploading records and exporting structured evidence packages is part of Pro Solo. Founder Lifetime locks in all future Solo features in one payment.
More in the knowledge base: Operator obligations · Inspection obligations · Maintenance records · Full FAQ
Ready
We’re building PflichtPilot with real users. If you work with compliance documentation, you’re invited.
Claim Founder Lifetimelimited early spots
Try it free first
