Use Case
Regulatory Change Response
AML/CFT updates, outsourcing rules, conduct requirements: material regulatory change should trigger a response, not a panic. You track the impact across your existing compliance coverage, see what’s affected, and update with the same audit trail.
The trigger
A new regulation is published. An existing framework is amended. Guidance is updated. The same painful cycle begins.
Weeks spent understanding what changed, what it means for your firm, and which existing procedures are now insufficient. Manual review against dense regulatory text.
Each change becomes a mini-project. Consultants are engaged at £2,000 for a one-off report, or firms carry retainers of £19,200/year. Resources are pulled from other priorities.
Even when changes are made, there’s no clear record of what changed in the regulation, what gaps it created, and how the firm responded. The audit trail is reconstructed, not built.
Verified knowledge that stays current
We maintain the regulatory knowledge base. You re-run your gap analysis against updated requirements and see where new gaps appear. You focus on closing them, not finding them.
New gaps surface when requirements change
The knowledge base updates. Your procedures are re-evaluated against the new requirements. Compliance items that were Comprehensive may now show as Partial or Insufficient. You see where the change creates new gaps.
Close gaps with your team
You get AI-drafted improvements to address new requirements. Your compliance team reviews, edits, and approves the changes. The result is stronger procedures. A consultant gives you a report you still need to act on.
Prove your response
Every gap identified, every improvement drafted, every review and approval: recorded in a complete audit trail. The regulator asks how you responded to a change. The answer is documented and defensible.
Coverage categories you can track
See the shift in your coverage profile before and after responding to a change. Track the movement from Insufficient and Partial to Adequate and Comprehensive across every compliance area.
Common trigger scenarios
New requirements on customer due diligence, beneficial ownership, or transaction monitoring. You see which procedures now have gaps and review drafted improvements with your team.
Updated requirements on third-party oversight, sub-outsourcing, or exit strategies. You see where your current procedures fall short and get suggestions for stronger coverage.
New governance expectations around substance, oversight, or record-keeping. You identify gaps in board-level policies and operational procedures against the updated requirements.
Changes to cross-border transfer rules, consent requirements, or processing obligations. You see where your data handling procedures need strengthening and review drafted improvements.
Turn change into a managed process
See how you find new gaps when regulations change, close them, and prove it.