1. Verification completed upfront is rigorous and objective
2. Reduce the number of applications progressing to assessment stage and increases confidence in the companies being assessed are suitable to win and can fulfil the award
3. Verification mechanism is automated and therefore quicker than when done manually
4. IUK can more quickly access company information as it is already linked to within the DBI
5. Any details updated on the DBI will automatically update Companies House - which will ensure the most up to date and accurate information is available
6. Automation of some financial checks will reduce the manual workload for finance teams enabling them to focus on more detailed checks
7. No need for direct integration between IUK and third party systems (all data is exchanged through BP)
8. Flexible and scalable model of data exchange (additional third party data sources can be added easily and new data attributes can be requested and provided without substantial cost of change)
9. Various sources and means available to verify companies not on Companies House or sole traders
Stage 1 involved multiple steps (see below), people and accumulating costs and effort for an application. The application is rejected much later in the process. The DBI hypothesis is that if applicant had an account then they could jump the stage 1 and thereby save all those costs. It would also reject applications upfront that don't have enough the required level of assurance (LOA) in their DBI account or has disqualifying attributes (like a bad credit rating or fraud check).
1. Why after only stage 1 (in the diagram below) with so many people, time and money spent on an application is due diligence only carried out?
2. How many are rejected after the due diligence report/process? what percentage?
3. What are the costs of processing those applications that are rejected after the due diligence step?
4. What are the due diligence costs of applications that are successful?