AI systems for financial and insurance firms, built by people who published on Law 25 first

Where the money leaks

Renewals depend on somebody remembering

A policy or an engagement comes up in October. It is in a system, and whether the client gets contacted in good time depends on whether a person looked at the right list in September. The ones that lapse are almost never the ones anybody decided to let go.

Document collection is most of the job

Statements, declarations, identification, signed forms, last year's return. The work cannot start until they arrive, most clients send some of them, and chasing the rest is a task somebody does between other tasks.

The compliance trail gets assembled after the fact

What was disclosed, when, to whom, and what the client agreed to. All of it exists somewhere across email, a file note and a system. Producing it as a coherent record is a small project every time it is asked for.

The same client information gets typed into four systems

Into the CRM, into the carrier or lender portal, into the document, into the accounting system. Every retype is a chance to introduce a discrepancy into a file that is supposed to be the record.

Everything queues behind a licensed person

A question arrives that only a licensed or designated professional can answer. It queues. Behind it queue twenty questions that did not need one, and the client cannot tell which of them they sent.

Onboarding takes weeks and most of it is waiting

Identification, verification, forms, signatures and internal review. Very little of the elapsed time is work. Nearly all of it is waiting for a document or a signature nobody chased.

What we automate

Renewal and engagement cycles

Every policy, engagement and recurring deadline tracked with the client contacted on your schedule, escalating to a person when the client does not respond, so nothing lapses by accident.

Document collection and chasing

Outstanding documents requested, tracked per client, and chased on a cadence that stops the moment the document arrives, with a person pulled in when it does not.

Client intake and onboarding

New client information, identification and forms collected through a structured intake, with the file assembled and the missing pieces surfaced instead of discovered at review.

Enquiry triage and routing

Incoming questions sorted by what they actually are, with general and administrative ones answered directly and anything requiring a licensed professional routed with the file attached rather than queued behind everything else.

Audit trail capture

Disclosures, consents, advice given and client instructions recorded as they happen, in a consistent format, so the record is produced rather than reconstructed.

Document reading and data extraction

Statements, declarations, applications and forms read on arrival with the relevant fields extracted for review, so the file is populated without anybody retyping it.

Retention and access rules

What is kept, for how long, and who can see it enforced by the system rather than by policy alone, with deletion happening on schedule instead of never.

Review and reputation flow

Feedback and review requests timed to the moment the client is happiest, within whatever your professional body permits you to solicit.

Insurance brokerages and agencies

The renewal is the business. Retention is worth more than acquisition and it is entirely a process problem. A renewal that gets contacted six weeks out behaves very differently from one contacted six days out.

The carrier portal is where time goes. Quoting the same risk across several carriers means entering the same information several times into systems that do not talk to each other or to you.

Claims are the moment you are judged. A client at first notice of loss is upset and wants to know somebody has it. Speed and clarity there decide the relationship for years.

Renewal cycles and remarketing

Renewals surfaced well in advance, clients contacted, changes in circumstance collected, and remarketing candidates flagged before the deadline rather than after it.

Application and submission preparation

Client and risk information collected once and assembled into carrier submissions, with the gaps flagged instead of discovered by an underwriter.

First notice of loss intake

Claims captured completely at first contact, in any channel and at any hour, with the client acknowledged immediately and a person alerted with the file.

Our carriers require their own portals. Does that block this?
No, it defines the shape of it. The carrier portal is a fixed constraint and is not going away. The work is making sure the information is collected once, correctly, on your side, and that everything around the submission, the chasing and the client communication does not depend on a person doing it.
Can a system give a client advice about coverage?
No, and it must be built so that it cannot. Advice is a licensed activity and the line is drawn explicitly in the escalation rules: the system handles administration, status, document collection and general information, and anything touching suitability or coverage recommendations goes to a licensed person with the file attached.
What about the AMF and our professional obligations?
They are a design input from the first conversation rather than something checked at the end. What the system may say, what it must escalate, what gets recorded and how long it is kept are decided against your obligations and your compliance officer's sign-off, and then documented.

Accounting, tax and bookkeeping

Your year is a wall. The work is compressed into a few weeks, and every hour lost to administration in that window costs several times what it costs in July.

You cannot start until the client sends the box. The single largest source of delay in an accounting practice is waiting for documents, and the chasing is done by people billing at professional rates.

The same questions arrive from every client. What do you need from me, where is my return, did you get my file, when is the deadline. Hundreds of them, at exactly the time nobody can answer them.

Client document collection

Personalised checklists sent per client, documents tracked as they arrive, and the missing ones chased automatically until they land or a person needs to call.

Engagement and deadline tracking

Filing and remittance deadlines tracked per client with the work scheduled backwards from them, so a deadline is a plan rather than a surprise.

Client status answers

Where-is-my-return and what-do-you-still-need answered directly from your practice system instead of consuming a preparer during the busiest weeks of the year.

Our clients are not technical. Will they use this?
They use whatever they already use, which is usually email or text, and the structure is added on our side. A system that requires an older client to learn a portal is a system that generates phone calls rather than removing them.
Is there a confidentiality problem in a system reading client documents?
It is the right question and it gets answered before anything is built. What is processed, where it runs, what is retained, and what never leaves your environment are all decisions rather than defaults, and they are written down. The Law 25 guide covers the reasoning in full.
We are a four person practice. Is this proportionate?
Small practices feel the document chase most, because the person chasing is also the person preparing. Document collection alone is a short build and it usually returns the most hours in the least time.

Mortgage brokers and lending

Speed to first contact decides the file. A borrower enquiring is enquiring with several brokers. The one who answers first and collects the file first is usually the one who funds it.

The condition list is the whole middle of the deal. Between approval and funding sits a list of documents and conditions, and every day one sits outstanding is a day of risk.

Rate and product questions arrive constantly. Most need a licensed answer and all of them arrive to whoever is nearest.

Enquiry response and qualification

New enquiries answered in minutes at any hour, with the initial information collected and a licensed broker reached with the file rather than a name.

Condition and document tracking

Outstanding conditions tracked per file, chased with the borrower and the referral partner automatically, and escalated when a funding date is at risk.

Referral partner updates

Realtors and referral sources kept current on their clients' files without anybody remembering to send an update.

Can it quote a rate?
It can state what you publish and nothing beyond it. Anything client-specific is a licensed conversation and goes to a person. This is one of the clearest lines in the whole build and it is drawn deliberately.
We handle very sensitive financial documents.
Which is why the retention, access and residency decisions come first. Who can see what, what is stored, where, and for how long are settled at design time and documented, not inherited from whatever a vendor defaults to.

Financial planning and wealth management

Client contact is the service and it is unevenly delivered. The clients who call get attention. The quiet ones get remembered eventually. That is a scheduling failure rather than a judgement about who matters.

Know your client documentation has a lifecycle. It has to be current, and keeping it current across a book of clients is a rolling administrative obligation nobody owns day to day.

Meeting preparation and follow-up eat the week. Assembling the pack before and writing the notes after take longer than the meeting.

Client review scheduling

Review cycles run per client on the cadence you committed to, with scheduling and reminders handled and the quiet clients surfaced rather than forgotten.

KYC and documentation currency

Client information and documentation tracked for currency, with updates requested and chased before they age out rather than at an audit.

Meeting preparation and follow-up

Pre-meeting packs assembled from your own systems and post-meeting notes, actions and confirmations captured and filed as part of the record.

Can a system communicate with clients about their investments?
Not about their investments, and that limit is built in rather than trusted to a prompt. It handles scheduling, administration, document requests, general information and preparation. Anything that touches advice, suitability or a client's specific holdings goes to the registered individual. That is both the regulatory position and the correct product design.
Our compliance department will want to review this.
They should, and in practice they are in the room early. The escalation rules, the retention policy and the record of what the system said and did are the parts compliance cares about, and they are documented so they can be reviewed rather than taken on trust.

Group benefits and employee plans

Every plan member is a support queue. Coverage questions, card requests, claim status and enrolment problems, all arriving to a broker whose actual client is the employer.

Enrolment periods are a wave. Compressed, deadline-driven, and consisting almost entirely of the same handful of questions and the same chasing.

Renewal season is a documentation exercise. Census data, claims experience and carrier submissions, all assembled by hand, all under a deadline.

Plan member question handling

Coverage, card and claim status questions answered from plan documentation and carrier information, with anything specific to an individual's claim routed to a person.

Enrolment period support

The enrolment wave absorbed with reminders, document collection and status answers, so the deadline is met without the team disappearing for three weeks.

Renewal data assembly

Census, experience and submission documentation assembled from what you already hold, with gaps flagged in advance of the carrier deadline.

Plan member data is sensitive health-adjacent information.
It is, and it is treated that way. What the system can access, what it may say to whom, and what is retained are constrained deliberately, and the default answer for anything specific to an individual's health or claim is to get a person rather than to answer.
Employers expect us to be the support desk. Does this change that?
It changes who absorbs the volume, not who is responsible. You stay the broker of record and the escalation point. The repeat administrative questions stop consuming the same people who handle the employer relationship.

Claims and adjusting

First notice sets the tone. The claimant is having a bad day. Whether somebody responded quickly and captured the information properly determines most of what follows.

Documentation arrives in fragments. Photos, estimates, reports and receipts trickle in from several parties and land in several inboxes.

Status enquiries are constant and answerable. Everyone with an interest in a claim wants to know where it is, and the answer is nearly always in the file.

First notice capture

Claims captured completely at first contact regardless of hour or channel, with the claimant acknowledged immediately and a person alerted with a full file.

Documentation gathering

Photos, estimates and reports requested from each party, tracked against what the file needs, and chased until complete.

Claim status communication

Claimants and interested parties updated on progress automatically, which removes most of the inbound volume and most of the frustration.

Can a system make a coverage determination?
No. It captures, organises, requests and communicates. Determination is an adjuster's decision and the system is built so it cannot be represented as anything else, including in the wording it uses with a claimant.
Claimants are often distressed. Is automation appropriate?
For acknowledgement and status, it is better than the alternative, because the alternative is frequently silence. The design point is that it never traps anybody: it says what it is, it captures what is needed, and it gets a person quickly. Being left without a reply is what people actually resent.

Which of these to fix first

Everything above is a list, and a list is not an order. If you want the order for your own week rather than for the industry in general, the automation scanner asks nine questions about how your week actually runs and returns the three jobs to automate first, with the hours each one gives back. It takes about two minutes and nothing you enter leaves your browser. If the problem is the site rather than what happens after someone gets in touch, the website test scores your page against the nine checks a first-time visitor makes.

And if you run several of these

Everything above assumes one operation. Once there is more than one, a second problem arrives on top of it, and it is not the first problem repeated. Nine locations answering the same customer question nine different ways is not a capacity failure, it is a consistency failure, and it does not show up in any individual site's numbers.

If you run more than one financial and insurance operation, or a franchise system, a regional chain, a dealer network or a practice group, the layer that goes over the top of this page is on the multi location page. Start here for the workflows, go there for what changes when you duplicate them.

Compliance is the reason to build carefully, not the reason to wait

We publish on this rather than reassure about it. Québec's Law 25 governs almost everything a firm in this sector would want to automate: intake, chatbots and voice, automated processing, retention, consent and the right to know how a decision was reached. The Law 25 guide sets out what it actually requires and what has to be settled before anything is connected, and there is a French version at Loi 25 et IA.

The decisions come first. Where data lives, what is processed, what is retained, for how long, who can access it, and what the system is never permitted to do. Those are answered before a line is written, and they are written down.

The escalation rules are a compliance artefact. The boundary between what a system may answer and what requires a licensed or designated person is not a technical detail. It is the control, it is reviewable, and your compliance officer should sign it.

The trail is a feature, not a byproduct. A properly built system produces a better record than the manual process it replaced, because it records at the moment things happen rather than from memory afterwards.

Bill 96 obligations for software and client communications are covered separately in the Bill 96 guide.

What a first build usually looks like in a firm like yours

Almost always document collection and renewals, in that order. Both are pure chasing, both are currently done by people whose time is expensive, and both fail quietly rather than loudly, which is why nobody has measured them.

The second piece is usually enquiry triage: sorting what actually needs a licensed person from what does not, so the professionals stop being the queue for administrative questions.

Everything is built on top of the systems you already run, and the compliance decisions are documented alongside it. You own the result and the documentation.

The staged version of that order, with the test that says each stage is finished, is in the ninety day roadmap.

Why Automatik

Built for your stack

Not a generic bot, the system is wired into the tools your business already runs.

You own the system

Full access, full documentation. No platform hostage-taking.

Bilingual by default

Customer-facing pieces work in French and English from day one.

Loi 25 compliant by design

Consent, transparency and data-handling designed in, not bolted on.

FAQ

Our regulator has not said anything about AI. Does that make this risky?
The absence of an AI-specific rule does not create a gap, because the existing obligations already apply: privacy, record keeping, supervision, and the requirement that licensed activities are performed by licensed people. Building to those is the conservative position and it is the one we take.
Can the system be prevented from saying certain things entirely?
Yes, and that is a large part of the work. Prohibited topics, mandatory escalations and required disclosures are enforced structurally rather than requested politely, and the behaviour is testable. If a rule cannot be tested, it is not a control.
Where does our client data actually go?
That is decided before anything is built, not discovered afterwards. Residency, processing location, retention periods and third party involvement are specified, documented and reviewable, which is the only answer that survives an audit.
We are a small firm without a compliance department.
Then the decisions still get made, they are just made with the principal rather than a department, and they get written down so there is something to point at. Small firms are frequently better served by this because there is nobody currently absorbing the administrative load.
How long does it take to set up?
Two to four weeks for a first workflow, and the extra time compared with other sectors is almost entirely the compliance design rather than the build. That is time well spent and we would rather take it.
What does it cost?
Scoped per project, with a fixed number after a discovery call rather than hourly billing. What it depends on is which systems are involved and how much compliance design is needed, both of which are settled in the discovery call.