Loan files verified before an analyst opens them
A consumer lender whose analysts spent the first twenty minutes of every file confirming that the documents agreed with each other.
Who they are.
A consumer lender competing on decision speed. Its analysts are paid to judge credit risk, but the file that reaches them is assembled by the applicant, from documents of very uneven quality.
Anonymised at the client’s request. Client names are never disclosed without written permission.
What had to be solved.
The first twenty minutes of every file went to reconciliation: does the name on the ID match the payslip, does the income on the payslip match the tax notice, is the IBAN the same everywhere. Doctored payslips were caught by instinct, or not at all, and files bounced back to applicants two or three times.
What success looked like.
- Give the analyst a file whose documents already agree
- Detect an altered income document rather than trusting it
- Ask the applicant once, for the exact page that is wrong
What Ceertia does here.
One use case per product, declaring the documents required and the consistency questions to answer across them. Identity, income and account details are reconciled before the file is queued, and every mismatch cites both source zones — so the applicant is told precisely what to correct.
The declared income must be consistent between the payslips and the tax notice; flag any gap beyond the policy tolerance.
How it runs, step by step.
The file arrives with its documents, in any format, from whoever sends it.
Every page is identified and mapped against the expected document list. Missing documents, duplicates and out-of-scope pages are flagged on receipt.
Each rule asks the file a question and answers it directly on the documents, with page, zone and source text attached to the verdict.
The team approves, requests a fix, or rejects. No file is approved or rejected automatically.
What changed.
Analyst time moved from reconciliation to credit judgement. The number of return trips to the applicant fell, because the request that goes out is specific instead of "your file is incomplete".
- Analysts reconciled names, incomes and IBANs by hand before any credit thinking started.
- Doctored payslips were caught by instinct, or not at all.
- Files bounced back to applicants two or three times before being complete.
- Identity, income and account consistency are checked before the file reaches an analyst.
- Every mismatch cites both source zones, so the applicant can be told exactly what to fix.
- Analyst time goes to credit decisions, not document reconciliation.
Anonymised case. Client names are never disclosed without written permission. Figures describe the file volumes and checks in this scenario.
Other files, same engine.
A financial institution required to refresh know-your-customer files across its corporate book, with documents expiring on eleven thousand different dates.
Read the case → Accounts payableStopping the payment before the wrong IBAN is usedA finance shared-services centre paying supplier invoices against purchase orders, after an attempted invoice-redirection fraud.
Read the case →See it run on your own files.
Bring one real file to a 30-minute demo. Watch the verification run, evidence on screen.