Claims management software: a practical buyer's guide

Last updated: 29 May 2026

US reader? See the US version of this guide with US-specific compliance detail (TCPA, NYDFS, CCPA, FedNow, US PCI scope guidance).

If you're handling claims at scale in the UK — insurance, healthcare, utilities, retail warranty, chargebacks, housing repairs — the manual way eats hours. Agents keying in details from phone calls, emails and PDFs. Claims sitting in someone's inbox waiting for review. Payments chased separately from the claim record. It's not that it doesn't work; it's that every handoff is a chance for something to go wrong, and the PCI DSS, FCA or ICO exposure rides along with every re-keyed card or claimant ID.

This guide walks through what claims management software does (it's the same thing as claims processing software — the names are used interchangeably), what to look for when choosing one, how the regulatory landscape has shifted under PCI DSS v4.0.1, and how Paytia's SecureFlow platform fits in when the claim includes a payment step. We've written it from the angle of teams who already know spreadsheets and shared inboxes don't scale and want a sober buyer's view, not a brochure.

What claims management software actually does#

At its simplest, claims processing software is a piece of business workflow automation dressed up for a specific job: moving a claim from "submitted" to "paid and closed" with as few manual steps as possible. A claim comes in through a phone call, web form, email, or API. The system validates the details, routes the claim to the right person (or approves it automatically if it fits the rules), handles any payment that's owed, and records every step for auditors.

The reason this matters isn't just speed. Manual claims handling is where errors creep in — a wrong policy number, a payment that went to the wrong account, a medical code that triggers a rejection from the insurer, an excess collected twice because nobody updated the spreadsheet. Those errors cost money and frustrate customers. Automated validation catches them at intake, not three weeks later when the customer chases for the third time.

The core workflow stages

Every claims platform we've configured ends up with the same six stages under the bonnet, even when the front-end looks completely different:

1. Intake. The claim arrives by phone, web form, email, API, or in some sectors still by post. Whatever the channel, the data has to land in one structured record with a unique reference.
2. Validation. Policy number checks, eligibility, duplicate detection, sanity checks on amounts. The cheap errors get caught here — and the suspicious ones get flagged for insurance fraud detection review.
3. Triage and routing. Rules decide whether the claim goes to auto-approval, a human reviewer, a specialist team, or straight to rejection. The smarter the rules, the less time senior staff waste on the easy cases.
4. Decisioning. The reviewer (or the rules engine) approves, partially approves, asks for more information, or rejects. Every decision goes on the record with a reason code.
5. Payment. Money moves. Inbound (an excess, a co-pay), outbound (a payout, a refund), or both inside the same claim. This is where the compliance scope sits, which we'll come back to.
6. Closure and reporting. The claim closes, the data feeds the management dashboards, and the audit trail is sealed for retention.

If your current process has any of these stages happening outside the system — a payment taken on a separate terminal, a decision recorded in email, a closure noted on paper — that's where the next audit will hurt.

What it doesn't do, and shouldn't pretend to

Claims software is not a substitute for a claims policy. It can enforce the rules you give it, but it can't decide whether your excess structure is fair, whether your turnaround SLAs are realistic, or whether the underwriter has priced for the loss ratio your handlers are actually seeing. We mention this because we've watched buyers expect software to fix process problems that are really commercial problems. The software pays for itself by removing handoff friction and re-keying; it won't redesign your claims approach for you.

Where the payment step changes things#

A lot of claims involve money moving: an insurance payout, a warranty refund, a medical reimbursement, a utility credit, an excess collected at FNOL, a co-payment for an upgraded service. The moment a card, bank account, or BACS/Faster Payments detail enters the workflow, two things happen. First, the work becomes regulated — PCI DSS v4.0.1 if a card is involved, UK GDPR and ICO scope on the surrounding data, FCA conduct rules if you're in regulated financial services. Second, anywhere that payment data touches your systems becomes part of your compliance scope.

This is where a lot of in-house claims systems go wrong. They get the workflow right but treat the payment as an afterthought — "we'll just take the card at the end and process it through our merchant account." That single decision can drag every system the payment touches into SAQ D, which is 329 PCI DSS requirements versus the 22 in SAQ A. That's the difference between "compliance is a line item" and "compliance is a department."

PCI DSS v4.0.1 in plain English for claims teams

PCI DSS v4 went live in March 2024 and v4.0.1 is the current revision. The old v3.2.1 standard retired in March 2024 and any future-dated requirements were enforceable from 31 March 2025 — a deadline that has now passed. If you're being pitched a claims system that ticks v3.2.1 controls, you're being pitched a stale answer. For the deeper breakdown specifically for insurers, see our guide to PCI compliance for insurance claims.

The bits of v4.0.1 that bite claims operations are:

• Targeted risk analysis (Requirement 12.3.1). You're now expected to document why a control frequency is appropriate to your environment, not just tick that the control exists. Auditors want the reasoning, not just the result.
• Authenticated scans inside the cardholder data environment (Requirement 11.3.1.2). Internal vulnerability scanning has to be authenticated. If a claims handler's workstation is in scope because they touch card data, that workstation is in the scan population.
• Stronger MFA on all CDE access (Requirement 8.4.2). Multi-factor authentication is required for any non-console administrative access and for all access into the cardholder data environment — including the claims handlers if your design puts them in scope.
• Anti-phishing controls (Requirement 5.4.1). Mechanisms to detect and protect personnel against phishing attacks. Claims teams are a phishing target; the QSA will ask how you cover it.
• Scripts and tags on payment pages (Requirements 6.4.3 and 11.6.1). If your claims portal takes a card on a page, every script on that page is now in scope for inventory, justification and integrity monitoring. This requirement alone has pushed a lot of buyers towards descoped phone capture.

The simplest way to avoid most of this is to stop letting card data into your environment at all. If the claim takes a payment over the phone, the standard model uses agent-assisted capture so the cardholder enters the card on their keypad and the agent never sees or hears it. If the claim takes a payment on the web, a tokenised iframe served by the payment provider keeps the card out of your DOM. Both routes shrink scope; both routes are what the v4.0.1 controls were written to encourage.

UK GDPR and ICO scope sit alongside PCI

Card data is one slice. Claims records carry medical details, addresses, vehicle registrations, household composition, photos of damage, recorded phone calls — all of which fall under UK GDPR and ICO oversight. The ICO has been clear that lawful basis, retention periods and data minimisation are areas they'll question. Claims systems that hoard everything "just in case" run straight into Article 5(1)(c) territory. A good platform lets you set retention per record type and purges automatically when the clock runs out.

FCA conduct rules for regulated firms

If you're an FCA-regulated insurer, broker or claims management company (CMC), the Consumer Duty (in force since July 2023 for new products, July 2024 for closed-book) means the claims journey has to demonstrably deliver good outcomes. That puts pressure on cycle-time reporting, complaints handling and clear communications inside the platform. The software won't make you compliant, but it has to give you the data to prove you are.

Good claims processing software handles the payment step as a first-class part of the workflow and, critically, keeps card data out of your environment. Paytia sits in this layer: the claim lives in your system, the money moves through ours, and the card number never touches your servers.

Comparing options? Book a 15-minute demo — we'll show you a live capture and quote a real number for your call volume.

What to look for when you're evaluating#

When you're evaluating claims processing software, the feature list from the vendor is less useful than answers to a few direct questions about how it actually behaves. We get sent a lot of comparison matrices; they almost all collapse to the same five questions when you peel the labels off.

Can you configure the workflow without a developer?

The workflow is the product. If changing an approval threshold or adding a reviewer requires a support ticket, the software will lock you into its view of how claims should work rather than yours. Watch for the gap between "configurable" in the sales deck and "configurable by your operations lead on a Tuesday afternoon" in real life. Ask for a live demo where the salesperson reshapes a rule on the call. If they can't, you've got your answer.

What happens to card data?

The honest answer is either "it goes through our PCI DSS Level 1 infrastructure and never touches your systems" or "you'll need to handle PCI compliance yourself." There isn't a comfortable middle ground here; ask directly. If the vendor says "we're PCI compliant," follow up with: at what level, with which SAQ, who's the QSA, and what's the scope of the attestation? A Level 1 AoC covers the vendor's environment. It doesn't automatically descope yours unless their architecture keeps card data away from your systems.

How does it handle the messy cases?

A claim that splits across multiple payments, a refund that needs to go back to the original card, a dispute that reopens a settled claim, an excess paid partly by card and partly by bank transfer, a chargeback that lands six months later. These are the everyday realities of claims work, not edge cases. Ask the vendor to demo the messy ones, not the happy path.

What does the audit trail actually record?

You want timestamped entries for every status change, every approval, every payment attempt — including failed ones — and the user identity behind each. When a regulator or auditor asks about claim 4417 from eleven months ago, the answer has to be in the system, not in someone's memory. Specifically check whether the audit log is immutable (write-once, append-only) or whether an admin can edit historical entries. The latter is a red flag for both PCI DSS and ICO reviews.

How does it integrate with what you already run?

CRM, billing, document storage, accounting, telephony, your underwriting platform if you're an insurer, your repair-network management if you're a motor or property claims operation. The less double-entry between systems, the fewer reconciliation problems you'll spend your Fridays solving. Look for REST APIs with proper documentation, webhooks for event-driven flows, and pre-built connectors — see how claims payment integration wires a claims platform directly into your existing systems for the common UK-market tools (Sage, Xero, Salesforce, Dynamics, HubSpot, Zoho).

What does the total cost look like over three years?

License fees are the headline. The numbers that matter are the implementation cost, the per-claim or per-transaction fees, the cost of integrations the vendor calls "optional," and the cost of staying on the supported version through the contract term. Get a three-year TCO from the vendor in writing. If they won't commit to one, walk.

Industry contexts — how the shape changes#

The shape of a claim varies a lot by sector, even when the underlying workflow is similar. A few examples of where the detail matters in the UK market.

Insurance

Property, motor, health, travel, pet, life. High document volume (photos, police reports, medical records, FNOL recordings), multi-party coordination (adjusters, contractors, providers, hire-car suppliers, salvage agents), regulatory reporting on top, and a growing need for insurance fraud detection woven into the workflow rather than bolted on after the fact. Claims often split across multiple payments and reviews. The payment is typically outbound to a claimant, but excess collection at FNOL is increasingly common, which is where tight claims payment integration with the policy admin system pays back the build cost fast. Motor insurance especially leans on telephony — first notification of loss is overwhelmingly by phone, which makes the payment-over-phone descoping pattern central to PCI compliance for insurance claims. The Financial Ombudsman Service publishes complaints data by firm; a tight claims platform helps you defend the cases that reach them.

Healthcare

Private medical, dental, optical, veterinary. UK GDPR plus the NHS Digital data security standards if you touch any NHS-adjacent data. Payment can be inbound (patient co-pays, deductibles, top-up fees), outbound (insurance reimbursements), or both inside the same case. Integration with practice management systems is usually mandatory rather than optional. A specific UK quirk: many patients still pay by phone for upfront fees, so descoped phone capture is a common requirement.

Financial services

Payment disputes, chargebacks, fraud claims, billing corrections, Section 75 claims, motor finance claims (the FCA review is still live and reshaping volumes). Tight regulatory reporting into the card networks and the FCA. The data you're handling is financial and personal in equal measure. Consumer Duty makes the journey itself reportable: how long it took, how clearly it was communicated, whether the outcome was fair. Your platform has to surface that data on demand.

Utilities

Service interruptions, billing disputes, damage claims, refunds, Guaranteed Standards of Performance payments. Lots of field coordination — someone physically goes to a site, writes up the damage, and that has to come back into the claim record. Ofgem and Ofwat both have standards that mandate compensation payments within set windows, which makes automated payout a hard requirement rather than a nice-to-have. Customer expectations are low, which means even a moderately responsive process looks good — but the regulator's expectations are not low.

Housing associations and social housing

Repair claims, disrepair claims (the post-Awaab's Law landscape has pushed this hard up the agenda), insurance recharges, leaseholder service charge disputes. Tight regulatory framework under the Regulator of Social Housing, plus the Housing Ombudsman Service for complaints. A platform that timestamps every contact, every contractor instruction and every customer communication is the practical defence against a Housing Ombudsman determination going against you.

Retail and e-commerce

Warranty claims, returns, refunds, shipping damage, "item not as described" disputes. The claim volume is high and the per-claim value is often low, so the workflow has to be lean or the margin disappears. E-commerce platform integration (Shopify, WooCommerce, Magento, BigCommerce) matters more than in other sectors. Refunds going back to the original card are the common pattern, which means the platform needs to hold a token reference without holding the card itself.

Travel and FX bureaux

Trip cancellation, lost baggage, currency hedging disputes, chargebacks on holiday spend. Tight seasonality, multi-currency, and a customer base that's emotionally invested in the outcome. Travel operators are also subject to ATOL and ABTA expectations on how claims are handled, which adds to the audit-trail requirements.

How Paytia fits in#

We build claims processing software on Paytia SecureFlow. The difference between this and an off-the-shelf product is that SecureFlow is a platform, not a shrink-wrapped application — we configure it to your claims process rather than asking you to adapt yours to ours. For most customers, that means a phased delivery: the critical path live in weeks, the harder integrations following in agile cycles.

The other thing SecureFlow brings is that the payment step is already inside the platform. When a claim is approved and needs to pay out, the payment runs through Paytia's PCI DSS Level 1 infrastructure — no separate merchant integration, no extra PCI scope for you to manage. This is the claims payment integration pattern in practice: one platform, one audit trail, no card data in your environment. When a claim includes an inbound payment (a co-pay, a deductible, a retailer return that came with a restocking fee, an insurance excess at FNOL), the same applies in reverse: the card data goes to us, the claim record stays with you.

How a typical UK claims build looks

The shape varies, but a representative project for an insurer or housing association tends to run like this:

• Week 1 — discovery. Two or three workshops with the claims team and the IT lead. We map the current workflow, the integrations, the reporting cadence and the compliance scope.
• Weeks 2-3 — first release. Intake, validation, basic routing and the payment layer live in test. Handlers can run a real claim from start to finish. Card capture is descoped from day one.
• Weeks 4-6 — integrations. CRM and accounting connectors, document storage, telephony hooks. Each one ships behind a feature flag so testing doesn't block production.
• Weeks 6-8 — reporting and analytics. Management dashboards, regulatory exports, Consumer Duty MI if you're FCA-regulated.
• Ongoing — iterate. Weekly release cadence. The rules engine, the templates and the integrations all change as the operation learns what it needs.

We're a Stripe partner on the card-processing side, which means the acquirer and gateway pieces are settled before the project starts. You don't need to negotiate a merchant agreement to get going.

The descoped phone capture in practice

The pattern that does the most work for claims teams is agent-assisted phone capture. A handler is on a call with a claimant, the claim is approved, an excess needs to be collected. The handler stays on the line and shares the call. The claimant enters the card on their own phone keypad. Paytia's platform intercepts the DTMF tones, sends them to the payment processor, and returns a success or failure code. The handler never sees or hears the card. The audio recording of the call doesn't contain the card. The handler's workstation never had card data on it. SAQ A applies, not SAQ D.

The same pattern works for web-based claim journeys: a tokenised iframe served from Paytia's infrastructure sits on your portal, the card data goes to us, the claim record gets a token reference. No card script lands in your DOM, which keeps the v4.0.1 script-inventory and integrity-monitoring requirements off your back.

What stays in your environment, what doesn't

It's worth being precise. Inside Paytia's PCI scope: the card PAN, expiry, CVV during capture, the token. Inside your environment: the claim record, the claimant's name and contact details, the policy reference, the amount, the timestamp, the token reference (a meaningless string outside Paytia). The token can be re-used for refunds to the same card without you ever holding the PAN. If a claimant disputes a refund a year later, your audit trail shows what was attempted; ours shows what hit the acquirer.

The full product is at solutions/claims-management. If you're specifically on the insurance-payout side, the insurance claims page walks through that workflow.

Common failure modes we see in the UK market#

We get called in to fix as many claims systems as we build from scratch. The failure modes are predictable.

The CRM with a claims module bolted on

A common starting point: the team has a CRM, the CRM has a "cases" or "tickets" object, someone decides cases can be claims. Six months in, the reporting doesn't work, the payment is taken on a separate terminal, and the audit trail is split across three systems. The right answer is usually to keep the CRM for what it's good at (customer record, marketing, sales pipeline) and stand up a dedicated claims layer that reads from and writes back to the CRM.

The spreadsheet that grew up

A claims operation runs on Excel for years, hits the limits, and the operations lead builds an Access database, then a SharePoint list, then a low-code app. Each step works for a while. The problem isn't the tooling; it's that compliance scope grew alongside it and nobody mapped it. By the time the QSA arrives, the cardholder data environment turns out to be 14 spreadsheets and a shared mailbox. A platform-based approach forces the scoping decisions up-front.

The contact centre platform doing payments

The CCaaS providers (Genesys, Five9, NICE CXone, Talkdesk, RingCentral, 8x8, Avaya, Amazon Connect) all have payment add-ons. Some are genuinely descoping, some are not. The honest test: does the card data hit the CCaaS infrastructure, even momentarily? If yes, the CCaaS environment is in your PCI scope. If no, you're probably fine. We integrate with all of these and slot in alongside them so the CCaaS keeps doing what it's good at (routing, recording, agent desktop) while we handle the payment layer.

The vendor that promised configurability

The demo was slick. The contract was signed. Eight months later, every workflow change requires a professional services ticket and a quote. This is the most expensive failure mode because it's hard to reverse — the team has built process around the system's limitations, and unwinding that means rebuilding the operation. Pre-empt it by asking, in the procurement stage, who can edit a workflow rule, what's the change-control process, and what's the SLA for "make this rule fire on Tuesdays instead."

The integration that never finished

Claims platform goes live; the accounting integration is "phase two." Phase two never arrives. The finance team ends up exporting CSVs and re-importing them into the ledger. This eats the productivity gain the platform was supposed to deliver. The fix is to insist on the integration as part of the initial scope, not as a future increment.

Edge cases worth thinking about up-front#

These come up often enough that you should ask the vendor how their platform handles them before you sign.

Refunds to a closed card

A claimant paid an excess in January. In November you settle the claim and need to refund. The card has been replaced. The acquirer's auto-update services (Visa Account Updater, Mastercard Automatic Billing Updater) handle a lot of this, but not all. Your platform needs a clean fallback to BACS or Faster Payments, with the right capture of bank details and the right audit trail. Check whether bank-detail capture in the platform is descoped from PCI (account number and sort code aren't PCI data, but the way you collect them matters for UK GDPR).

Split payments across multiple claimants

A claim has two named insured parties. The payout splits 60/40. The platform needs to handle two payment legs against one claim record, with two audit trails, and reconcile both back into the ledger correctly. A surprising number of "claims platforms" assume one claim equals one payment.

Reopening a closed claim

Six weeks after closure, the claimant comes back with a new piece of evidence. The platform needs to reopen the claim without losing the original audit trail, allow the new evidence to be attached, and either issue a top-up payment or claw back the original. The clawback is where many platforms fall over because it requires either a chargeback through the acquirer or a separate inbound payment from the claimant, both of which need recording properly.

Multi-language and accessibility

UK claimants include people whose first language isn't English and people with disabilities. The Equality Act 2010 puts a duty on regulated firms to make reasonable adjustments. A claims platform that only works for the standard journey leaves you exposed. Look for built-in language switching on the customer-facing parts, screen-reader-compatible portals, and the ability to flag a claimant's communication preferences against the record.

Recorded calls and the data inside them

If the claim was taken by phone and the call was recorded, the recording is a piece of personal data. If the claimant read out their card number on the call (which they shouldn't have done, but it happens), the recording is now in PCI scope. Descoped phone capture solves this prospectively. For the historical recordings, you need a retention and redaction policy and a platform that supports both.

Comparing the standard model with a descoped approach#

Most claims platforms still assume the standard model: card data flows through the platform, the platform passes it to the gateway, the gateway settles to the acquirer. That puts the platform vendor's entire environment in PCI scope, and (more importantly for you) it puts the integration touchpoints with your environment in scope too.

The descoped approach inverts this. The card data never touches the platform or your environment. The claimant enters it directly into the payment provider's secured capture mechanism (phone keypad, hosted iframe, hosted payment page) and the platform receives a token and a result code. The claim record references the token; the PAN exists only inside the payment provider's certified environment.

The difference matters in three places:

• Audit cost. SAQ A is roughly 22 controls; SAQ D is 329. The annual QSA effort scales accordingly.
• Breach exposure. If a system holding card data is breached, you have notification duties to the ICO, the card schemes and the affected customers. If you don't hold card data, the breach surface is materially smaller.
• Integration speed. Descoped platforms can be integrated into a CRM or CCaaS quickly because there's no shared CDE to design around.

This isn't a marginal preference. The PCI Security Standards Council's own guidance encourages descoping wherever possible, and v4.0.1 is structured around making the descoped route easier to verify than the in-scope route.

What good due diligence looks like#

If you're running a tender or a vendor selection, here's the short list we'd give procurement.

• Ask for the vendor's PCI DSS Attestation of Compliance, not just a marketing claim. Check the version (should be v4.0.1) and the scope.
• Ask for a list of which of their customers are in your sector and let you talk to two of them unscripted.
• Ask for a worked example of a workflow change: who does it, how long it takes, what it costs.
• Ask for the data export format. If you ever switch platforms, can you take your claim history with you in a structured form?
• Ask about the breach notification process from the vendor's side. If they detect an incident, when do you find out and through what channel?
• Ask for the vendor's penetration test summary from the last 12 months. They don't have to share the full report, but a redacted executive summary should be available.
• Ask about UK data residency. Where does the data sit? Who has access to it? Are there sub-processors outside the UK or EEA, and what's the lawful basis for the transfer?

If a vendor balks at any of these, that's information.

Frequently asked questions#

What's the difference between claims processing and claims management?

Claims processing is the nuts and bolts — intake, validation, approval, payment, closure. Claims management is the wider picture: reporting, analytics, performance review, process improvement, regulatory MI for the FCA or Ofgem. They sit one on top of the other. You need both, and they should share a database so your reporting isn't fighting your operations for ground truth. When a vendor sells you one without the other, ask how the gap gets filled.

How long does implementation take?

It depends on how much of your process needs building. Simple workflows live in 1-2 weeks; more involved systems with multiple integrations run 4-8 weeks or more; an enterprise insurance build with five integrations and Consumer Duty MI typically runs 10-14 weeks. We work in weekly release cycles, so the essentials go live first and the rest follows without a big-bang go-live. The biggest delay is usually not the build — it's getting time with the customer's IT team for the integration testing windows.

Does it integrate with our existing systems?

Yes — the platform exposes REST APIs and webhooks, plus pre-built connectors for the common CRM, ERP, accounting and telephony tools (Salesforce, Dynamics, HubSpot, Zoho, Sage, Xero, plus the major UK contact centre platforms). Most customers keep the systems they already have and let SecureFlow sit between them, pulling and pushing data as the claim moves through the workflow. We'll map the integrations in discovery and tell you which ones we've built before, which need a fresh connector, and what the time and cost is for each.

Is it secure under PCI DSS v4.0.1?

The payment side is PCI DSS Level 1 certified under v4.0.1 — that's Paytia's core. For the surrounding claim data we use encryption in transit and at rest, role-based access, MFA on administrative access, and a detailed audit trail on every action. Because the architecture keeps card data away from your environment, your own PCI scope drops to SAQ A on the payment surface. If UK GDPR, ICO obligations or FCA Consumer Duty apply to your sector, we'll talk about the specific controls that matter rather than ticking a generic compliance box.

What industries use it?

Insurance (motor, property, travel, pet, life, health), healthcare (private medical, dental, optical, veterinary), financial services (disputes, chargebacks, motor finance claims), utilities, housing associations, retail warranty operations, FX bureaux and travel operators. Any business where a claim or dispute has to move from "submitted" to "settled" through multiple steps and people. If you're processing more than a few hundred claims a month manually and hitting the limits of spreadsheets, shared inboxes and paper trails, it's the right conversation.

What does it cost?

There's a setup fee that covers discovery, configuration and integrations — sized to the project. Then a monthly platform fee and a per-transaction fee on the payment side. We don't publish a fixed price list because the projects are too varied to make it useful, but we'll give you a fixed quote after the discovery workshops. If we can't, we'll tell you why, and we won't ask you to commit to anything until you've seen the number.

Can we get out of the contract if it doesn't work?

Yes. Our standard terms are a 12-month initial term with a 90-day notice period after that. You can export your claim data at any point in a structured form. We've not had a customer leave so far, but we've written the contract on the basis that we have to earn the renewal each year.

What happens if the platform goes down during a claim?

The platform runs on PCI DSS Level 1 infrastructure with a documented availability SLA in your contract. For the payment layer specifically, in-flight transactions either complete or roll back cleanly — there's no half-paid state. For the workflow layer, claims handlers can still see the current state of every claim and take notes; the queued actions resume when the platform is back. We publish incident notices through the same channel as our standard product communications and we'll talk through the resilience design in discovery.

Do we need to be a Paytia payments customer to use the claims build?

The payment layer is part of SecureFlow, so if there's a payment step in the workflow, that step runs through us. If your claims operation is purely outbound and the payments leave through your existing BACS file process, we can build the workflow without the payment surface. Most customers find the payment piece is the part with the highest compliance load, so combining them is usually the cheapest answer overall.

If you'd like to talk through how a claims workflow might look for your business, get in touch. We can walk through the steps and where the payment layer fits.

Related reading#

• What is Claims Processing? Definition and How It Works

For the product side, see our Agent-assisted payments solution.

Comparing options? Book a 15-minute demo — we'll show you a live capture and quote a real number for your call volume.

Related guides in this cluster#