Six months of statements, one page at a time
A client uploads their bank statements. Some are downloaded PDFs, some are screenshots from a banking app, one month is a photo of a printed page taken at an angle. The caseworker opens each file, notes the start and end dates, checks the page numbers run in order, confirms the name and account number match, and writes it all into a table in Word.
Page 3 of 4 is missing from March. The screenshot for May stops at the 19th. The payslips show a different employer name from the one on the statements, because the payroll is outsourced. Each of these is a query for the client, and each was found by someone reading dates line by line.
Why this checking lands on senior people
The checks sound simple, so they are rarely written down as a procedure. Instead, the most careful person in the team ends up doing them, because they are the one who spotted the missing page last time. That person is usually also the one whose time is most valuable elsewhere.
The evidence also arrives in pieces over weeks, so the check is done several times on the same file as new documents come in. Nothing records what was already verified, so each pass starts again from the top.
The cost of doing it by eye
| Problem | Consequence |
|---|---|
| Missing page spotted late | Another request to the client, days before the planned submission |
| Date gap overlooked | The file goes forward with a hole nobody noticed |
| Repeated checking | The same statements read three times as the bundle grows |
| Senior time used | Advisers doing clerical checks instead of case work |
| No record of checks | No way to show what was verified and when |
What the evidence checker does
- Clients upload statements, payslips and letters through a secure page, or staff drop in files received by email.
- Each document is read with OCR and extraction, using a model such as OpenAI or Anthropic Claude where layouts vary, to pull out the holder name, account or employer, statement period, page numbers and closing balances.
- The system builds a timeline per account showing covered dates, and highlights any gap, overlap or missing page in the sequence.
- Names, account numbers and employer details are compared across documents, and differences are listed for the caseworker to look at, not silently resolved.
- Images that are too poor to read are flagged back to the client straight away with a request for a clearer copy.
- The caseworker reviews a one-page summary, ticks what they have verified, and that record is saved against the matter with the date and their name.
We set the checks to your firm's own rules for what period and which documents a caseworker wants to see. The system does not decide whether evidence meets any requirement. It shows the facts so your adviser can.
Checking becomes reviewing
The caseworker opens a timeline instead of a pile of PDFs. Gaps are obvious. Queries go to the client the day the documents arrive, not the week before submission. When new statements come in, only the new ones are read, and the summary updates.
Senior advisers look at the flagged items and the judgement calls, which is the part that genuinely needs them.
It also makes handovers easier. If the file moves to a colleague, the summary shows which documents were checked, what was found and what is still open, so nobody starts the checking again from the first page.
Recognise this in your files?
- Someone builds a table of statement dates by hand for each client
- Missing pages are found shortly before submission
- Clients send screenshots and photos rather than full statements
- The same bundle is checked more than once
- There is no saved record of which documents were verified