Does Unity Practice Management publish a public API?
No. Unity Practice Management, the UK legal practice management and accounts system formerly sold under the Quill name, publishes no public developer documentation. The quill.co.uk domain now redirects to dyedurham.co.uk following the acquisition, and no API documentation for Unity is published there either. For a firm evaluating card and expense tooling, the practical position is clear: there is no documented interface for a third party to build against.
Why do acquisitions make this harder to check?
When a product changes hands, its developer material tends to move or disappear. The old marketing site redirects, the documentation is folded into the acquirer's estate, and what remains findable is partner listings rather than technical reference. That is the situation here, and it is why the honest answer is based on what is published today rather than on what a partner page implies.
What does that mean for a law firm's card spend?
Without published API documentation, no card platform can offer Unity a supported live sync. Card and expense transactions reach the practice accounts the way they usually do in UK firms: keyed by the accounts team against the client and matter, or loaded from a file in the layout Unity accepts.
The recurring cost is disbursement coding. Fee earners spend on cards — travel to a hearing, search fees, courier charges — and every one of those lines needs the right client and matter before it can be recharged or absorbed. Reconstructing that from a card statement weeks later is slow and it leaks billable value.
How does Vergo work with Unity Practice Management?
Vergo captures the coding at the moment of spend. The fee earner picks the client and matter and the expense type on their phone and photographs the receipt. Approvals run inside Vergo. At the end of the period, Vergo generates a custom-built CSV export matched to the import format Unity Practice Management expects, and the accounts team loads a single reviewed batch.
Vergo does not claim an API sync with Unity Practice Management, because none is published. The claim is that the file route works like automation when the coding happens first.
Should firms expect this to change?
Possibly, but plan on what exists. If Dye & Durham publishes developer documentation for Unity, the position is worth revisiting. Until then, file-based integration is the dependable path and should be the basis of any evaluation.
What does the accounts team stop doing?
They stop retyping. In the manual version, an accounts assistant works down a card statement, emails fee earners asking what a charge was for, waits, gets partial answers, and keys each line against a client and matter reconstructed from those replies. That is several days a month of work that produces no new information — it only recovers information that existed at the moment of spend and was allowed to evaporate.
How should a firm evaluate card providers against Unity?
Ask any provider claiming a Unity integration to name the vendor documentation behind it. Where none exists, the honest offer is a structured file import, and the thing worth comparing is what arrives in that file: whether client and matter coding is captured by the fee earner or added later, whether receipts are attached, and whether approvals are recorded before the export is produced. Those differences determine how much work the accounts team is left holding.
Does Unity Practice Management have a public API?
No public developer documentation is published for Unity, including on the acquirer's site after quill.co.uk began redirecting to dyedurham.co.uk.
Is Unity the same product as Quill?
Unity Practice Management is the system formerly sold under the Quill name. The lack of published API documentation applies under either name.
How does Vergo get card spend into Unity?
Fee earners code each charge to client and matter in Vergo with a receipt attached, and Vergo produces a CSV export matched to Unity's import format for the accounts team to load.
Does this handle disbursements charged to a matter?
Yes. Capturing the client and matter at the point of spend means rechargeable card costs arrive coded to the matter that should carry them, with the receipt attached.
