Same ads.
More signed cases.

No — it changes what they spend the day on. Justo answers first, asks the ten questions and writes the file; your team calls a client whose facts are already down and whose language is already handled, instead of starting from zero on a callback. Firms without intake staff get the part they were going to hire for; firms with intake staff get their nights, weekends and Spanish-speaking callers covered. Nobody at your firm is replaced by it, and the consult, the advice and the signing are your people — always.

Email and text, the way they do now — plus a shared workspace your team can open on a phone. There is no new inbox to check and no software for your staff to learn; the only new habit is tapping a status when a case moves.

Powered pushes new intakes into your system. Which systems are supported at pilot depends on what the founding firms actually use — we build for the cohort in front of us rather than advertising a catalogue we have not tested.

No. Your intake link and QR code work from whatever site you have now — a button, a page, a printed card. Modernize rebuilds the site around the intake, and it is a separate, scoped project you would choose on purpose.

There is almost nothing to use. Leads arrive by email and text the way they do now; the only new habit is tapping a status when a case moves — contacted, consult, signed. That single tap is what makes the report work, which is exactly why it is one tap and not a form.

Nothing. Missed-call rescue uses carrier-level forwarding on the number you already advertise, so your number stays yours and stays on your ads. Per-campaign tracking numbers are additional and optional.

Days, not a quarter. The intake link and the workspace go up first; tracking numbers and the case-management push follow in the same week.

Any month. That is the point of month-to-month: a firm that stays because the report proved the spend is validation, and a firm locked into a contract it wants out of is not.

No. Justo works entirely before the matter exists — it sees only what a prospective client chooses to tell it during intake. It never touches your matter files, your work product, or privileged correspondence. Prospective-client information is treated as confidential for your firm even when no relationship forms.

Your firm, and the people at your firm you invite. Every record is scoped to your firm at the database level, not by a filter in application code — a query that tried to read another firm's leads returns nothing. On Justo's side, access is limited to what operating the service requires and is logged. We keep as little as the job allows: behavioural data (timestamps, channels, response times) is the asset; a caller's phone number is a liability, so it is restricted, aggregated in reports, and purged on a schedule. Prospective-client information can be confidential for your firm even when no relationship forms — we treat it that way, and the full data-handling terms come with the engagement letter, not after it.

No. Justo does not train models on your conversations, your clients' words, or your outcomes — not for our own models, and not for anyone else's. The conversation runs on a commercial AI provider under terms that prohibit training on submitted data; we name the provider and show you those terms on the founder call rather than asking you to take a page's word for it. The only thing that could ever be pooled across firms is counts and rates — response times, channel performance — never case values, never a client's words, never anything that identifies a person.

Justo does not run them, and it should not — that stays with your firm. What it does is put the parties in front of you before you call: the client, the other driver, the employer behind a commercial vehicle, the carrier that gets named. A prepared file makes a conflicts check faster and earlier; it never replaces one, and nothing in the intake creates a relationship that a conflict could attach to.

The conversation never pretends to be one — every client is told plainly, in the frame, that it is automated. If someone asks for a human, says something that needs one, or simply stops answering, the file still reaches you with whatever was captured and a note about where it ended. An unfinished conversation is a lead with a gap in it, not a lead that evaporated.

It is built so the expensive mistakes are structurally unavailable: it never gives legal advice, never assesses a case, and every extracted fact is read back to the client and marked with where it came from — confirmed, AI-extracted, or needs investigation. You see the client's original words next to every summary, so nothing reaches you as a claim you cannot check.

Nothing is lost. Behind the conversation sits the same intake as a plain step-by-step form, and it is what a client gets if the AI is unavailable — fewer questions, same lead, still in both languages. That is the fallback, not a promise about uptime: an outage should cost you a nicer conversation, never a case.

No per-conversation cap and no metered line item — flat means flat, and a firm having a good month should never see it on an invoice. If volume ever changed what it costs to serve you, that is a conversation we would have with you in advance, not a surprise charge. This is the same rule as the pricing: nothing you pay ever varies with what your cases are worth.

Only the founding pilot has a stated setup fee today — $2,500, which buys founder-led onboarding and the two launch tests. Connect and Powered are monthly-only at pilot stage. If that ever changes it will be on this page before it is on an invoice.

Two honest limits. Walk-ins and pure word of mouth cannot be attributed unless someone scans a QR code or clicks a link. And ad spend is a number you report at the pilot stage — connecting directly to Google and Meta is on the roadmap, not shipped. The report labels both rather than inventing a figure.