Lease agreement and any novations — identity, definitions, the return-condition framework.
The contracted target condition per system at handback.
Maintenance-reserve and compensation rate tables — the settlement basis.
Variations and amendments that override the schedules — applied last.
Status and shop-visit data — turns contracted targets into a live settlement figure.
Every return condition and compensation rate in the bundle is extracted, clause-referenced and organised under the thirteen systems a redelivery team actually manages:
Target extracted, benchmark set. The lease states the return condition and we’ve captured it against its clause.
Target known, awaiting records. The contracted condition is clear; engineering actuals turn it into a settlement position.
No document speaks to it. A drafting or negotiation gap — surfaced and ranked, never silently defaulted.
Redelivery readiness is the mapped share of the 219 line items, with a per-system coverage heatmap and a ranked gap list weighted by settlement materiality — so the work plan starts with what moves money.
Close-out is modelled on the four events that carry the money — airframe heavy check, engine performance restoration & LLPs, landing-gear overhaul, APU restoration. For each, the life potential remaining at return is compared with the position at delivery, on the lease’s half-life or full-life basis: more potential returned than delivered and the lessor compensates the operator; less, and the operator compensates the lessor.
Clause-ambiguity flags. The review also flags lease language that moves settlements before any engineering does — for example:
Readiness score, indicative net settlement exposure and the section heatmap. Watermarked indicative — a screen, not a citation.
Every condition expert-validated against the lease: the populated 15-tab exit tracker, redelivery memo, ranked gap list and clause-ambiguity flags.
A hands-on redelivery campaign for one aircraft, or a lease-return programme across a fleet — live tracker through handover.