What this does: Before you can audit whether an institution broke rules, you need to know which rules govern them. This prompt identifies the regulatory, statutory, or contractual framework that establishes what they must do—and gives you the specific sources to verify against.
When to use it: Start here with any adversarial dispute. You have a document (bill, denial letter, contract, notice) and you need to understand what legal/regulatory framework controls how that institution must behave.
I'm dealing with [brief situation description] involving [institution type]
in [state/jurisdiction].
I have [document type - e.g., hospital bill, insurance denial, collection notice].
What regulatory frameworks, statutes, industry standards, or contractual terms
govern how [institution] must handle this situation?
For each framework you identify:
1. Provide the specific statute number, regulation code, or standard name
2. Explain what obligations it creates for [institution]
3. Tell me where I can access the actual source document to read it myself
4. Identify what format I need the documentation in to audit against this
framework (e.g., CPT codes for Medicare, policy section numbers for insurance)
Focus on frameworks that create mandatory requirements, not discretionary ones.
I need rules they MUST follow, not guidelines they SHOULD follow.
How to interpret the output:
Look for specificity. Good output gives you statute numbers like "15 U.S.C. § 1692c" or "16 CFR Part 453" or "IDEA 20 U.S.C. § 1414(a)(1)". Bad output says "consumer protection laws" or "federal regulations" without specifics.
Look for access information. The output should tell you where to find the actual regulation—a .gov website, a specific agency's rules, your state's statutes. If it doesn't, ask: "Where exactly can I read [regulation] to verify this?"
Look for mandatory language. The frameworks should establish requirements (must, shall, required to) not suggestions (should, encouraged to, best practice). You need rules with teeth.
Verification step:
Take the top 2-3 frameworks the AI identified. Look them up yourself. Google the statute number or regulation code. Read enough of the actual source to confirm: (1) it exists, (2) it actually governs this type of situation, (3) it creates mandatory requirements like the AI described.
If you can't find the regulation or it doesn't say what the AI claimed, don't proceed with that framework. Only use frameworks you've personally verified exist and apply.
Example good output:
"Your situation is governed by the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), 15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq. This federal law prohibits specific debt collection practices. Key sections for your situation:
You can access the full statute at: https://www.ftc.gov/legal-library/browse/statutes/fair-debt-collection-practices-act
Additionally, your state (California) has a statute of limitations for debt collection under Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 337: 4 years for written contracts, 2 years for oral contracts.
To audit this collection notice, you need: (1) dates of all contacts, (2) date of original debt/last activity, (3) exact language from their notice."
Example bad output: