Scenarios
What Drumtap catches, told in six trade-subvertical stories.
These are the cash-flow gaps our founders see on real trade AR portfolios — anonymized, told in founder voice, and walked the same way we walk them on a call: the GC pay-app situation, what Drumtap surfaced from the forwarded evidence, and the recovery outcome. Every story ties to a per-cycle reconcile in QuickBooks.
Private beta waitlist
Join the private beta waitlist.
Leave your email to signal interest while we prepare private-beta access. We will share timing and final terms before access opens; joining does not create an account or start payment.
The stories below are illustrative trade-subvertical scenarios — not named real customers, not GC logos. They describe the kind of recovery Drumtap is built to draft.
Drywall
A drywall sub files a pay app with an expired conditional waiver template version on a tenant buildout.
A drywall sub files the monthly pay app through the GC portal as normal. The pay app packages the original conditional waiver, but the GC swapped the waiver template two cycles back — the sub is still on the old version. The portal rejects the submission the same day it clears AP.
The forwarded AP rejection notice cites the expired waiver template version. Drumtap reads the current waiver template the GC uploaded last cycle, lines the signed change order that sequenced the version, and rebuilds the rejection evidence the AP clerk needs to clear the line on the next reconcile.
The refile packet is accepted on the next pay cycle — the pay app clears, the books close on the original invoice, and the sub stops emailing the AP clerk every Monday.
Electrical
A one-truck electrical sub on T&M gets the labor rate rounded down and the material markup line dropped on the next pay app.
A one-truck electrical sub runs time-and-materials on a remodel. The GC portal accepts the hours the sub submitted but rounds the labor rate down to the original bid number and quietly drops the material markup line. The invoice the sub sent and the pay app the GC approved stop matching in QuickBooks the same day.
Drumtap reads the forwarded AP email, lines the T&M sheet and the material receipt, and matches the discrepancy line-by-line on the next reconcile. The labor-rate round-down and the missing markup line are flagged as two separate disputed discrepancies — each tied to the underlying sheet or receipt.
The AP clerk pays the difference on the next cycle. The invoice and the pay app match in QuickBooks and the sub stops having to explain the gap every pay run.
Plumbing
A plumbing sub emails the pay app to AP but it never lands on the pay cycle — AR ages while the books say it is submitted.
A plumbing sub emails the pay app directly to the GC AP inbox because the portal upload timed out. The AP clerk takes the subportal submissions first and the emailed pay app slips a cycle. AR keeps aging while QuickBooks shows the invoice as "submitted" — the books never see the missing cycle back.
The forwarded AP timestamp and the portal submission log lock the pay app down on the next reconcile. Drumtap pulls the submitted/cycle-closed history across the last three pay cycles and shows the gap between what the sub sent and what the AP clerk processed.
The refile packet is accepted on the next cycle. AR closes on the original invoice amount and the books stop drifting from the pay cycle.
Mechanical
A six-worker mechanical sub carries retainage across three pay apps outside the contract release schedule.
A six-worker mechanical sub sees three pay apps in a row marked "approved" in the GC portal. The retained amount does not release on the schedule the contract calls for. AR keeps growing while QuickBooks shows the invoice as approved.
Drumtap reads the forwarded AP email, pulls the contract retainage clause, and ties each retained pay-app line back to the clause. The three stuck pay apps are flagged as a single overdue-retainage discrepancy on the next reconcile.
The release request goes out with the contract clause and the pay-app history attached. Retainage clears on the next cycle and the books stop aging against the contract schedule.
Roofing
A roofing sub gets a rejection for a missing tear-off SOV line bundled under the old reroof line on a re-roof.
A roofing sub files the re-roof pay app against the original SOV. The new tear-off scope landed under a separate CO that the sub did not sequence onto the same line. The GC portal rejects the submission for the missing tear-off line and bundles it back under the original reroof SOV line.
Drumtap reads the forwarded rejection note, lines the CO with the tear-off scope, attaches the daily logs and the photos from the tear-off day, and rebuilds the missing-line evidence on the next reconcile.
The refile packet is accepted on the next pay cycle. The tear-off line closes against the CO and the books stop double-counting the reroof scope.
Concrete
A concrete sub is short-paid on a foundation pour because a change-order delta never makes it onto the SOV.
A concrete sub pours the foundation per CO-02 but the GC portal SOV still runs the original pour quantity. The AP email short-pays the next cycle to the original line — the CO-02 delta disappears into the SOV rather than getting billed as a separate change-order line.
Drumtap reads the forwarded AP email, the signed CO-02, and the pour photo log. The delta is tied back to CO-02 on the next reconcile and flagged as a disputed discrepancy against the short-paid line.
The AP clerk pays the CO-02 delta on the next cycle. The books close on the actual pour quantity and the sub stops losing the delta on every foundation pour.
Private beta waitlist
Join the Drumtap private beta
Drumtap is preparing a private beta for trade contractors who want a clearer path from GC portal discrepancies to the next documented action. Join the waitlist for timing and next steps before access opens.