If your compliance team is reviewing Paytia, this page is for them. Three US frameworks do most of the work in vendor risk reviews for insurers: the NAIC Insurance Data Security Model Law, Florida's breach and data-protection rules, and NY DFS 23 NYCRR 500 (including the 2023 amendments). Here's where we sit on each.
The point of this page
We're not a regulated insurer. But every one of those frameworks reaches into the third-party providers insurers use, and the test is what the provider doeswith regulated data — not what category of company they are. That's the line insurers run vendor risk assessments along. It's the line we have to answer on.
What Paytia does inside an insurance workflow
In a typical deployment we're doing much more than taking card payments. We capture claim information through configured e-forms. We move claims through a workflow with role-based approvals. We take inbound payments (co-pays, deductibles, premiums) and run outbound ones (settlements, refunds). And we keep a line-by-line audit log of every field change and every action.
So we sit in the middle of how regulated data moves through the business. That's why a generic payment-processor vendor questionnaire tends not to fit — the questions are built for a different shape of thing.
How the platform is built
Paytia is a single cloud-hosted application that combines data capture, workflow, payments, and integrations into one controlled environment. Data comes in through defined interfaces. It gets processed by the workflow rules your team configured. It goes out to users or external systems, logged at every step.
One principle runs through all of it:
Sensitive data belongs in one controlled environment, not scattered across six systems that each hold a partial view.
If the data lives in one place, you only have to prove controls over one place. That's the short version of why the regulatory story gets simpler.
The claims lifecycle, end to end
We cover the claim from first notification to settlement, not just the moment money moves.
Data capture. Claim forms that match your actual process, not a generic template. Structured fields for claimant, policy, and incident data, with space to attach supporting evidence as the claim develops.
Workflow. Each claim is a case that moves through defined steps. Tasks land with the right people. Approvals need the right authority. Anything that stalls surfaces on a dashboard, not in an inbox.
Multi-party access. Adjusters, contractors, and partner firms work inside the same case with scoped permissions. No file-share workarounds. No PII drifting through email.
Audit trail. Every action logged: who, when, which field, what changed. Bottleneck analysis, KPI tracking, and regulatory reporting all come off the same log. It matters when an auditor asks you to reconstruct a specific claim from eleven months ago.
How we handle the data itself
Because we're managing the whole workflow and not just a single transaction, the data model is deliberate. Fields get tagged by sensitivity at capture. Sensitive ones stay isolated inside the platform. Access is gated by role and workflow stage. Retention and deletion rules run once a case closes.
The upshot for your team: personal, financial, and operational data can live in one environment without one blanket control regime covering everything the same way. High-sensitivity fields get high-sensitivity treatment. The rest gets handled proportionately.
Payment and banking data
Payment handling sits inside the workflow rather than bolted on. We capture cards and bank details securely, route them to the payment provider you've chosen, tokenise what comes back, run outbound payments for settlements and refunds, and reconcile against your accounting records.
The design choice that matters most: card and bank data lives inside Paytia's certified environment, not yours. It never has to reach your internal systems. That keeps the regulated scope contained to one vendor — rather than spread across your whole IT estate and every team that touches a call recording, a CRM note, or a ticket.
Lifecycle, not just protection
The hard part of regulatory compliance usually isn't the encryption or the access controls. It's the lifecycle. Who deletes what, when, under whose authority. What has to stay for audit. What has to go, and how you prove it went.
We handle it with field-level sensitivity tags, controlled storage inside the platform, and retention or deletion rules that fire when a workflow completes. Transaction card details drop once the payment settles. Temporary processing fields clear once the case moves on. Only what you genuinely need for audit or reporting stays behind. That's in line with where regulators are pushing on data minimisation.
Against NAIC
The NAIC Insurance Data Security Model Law focuses on three things: protecting non-public information, running real risk management, and putting someone accountable at the top.
What we bring to that picture is one controlled environment for sensitive data handling rather than five. Structured workflows with defined accountability at each step. Audit trails detailed enough to survive a regulator review. Because sensitive data doesn't proliferate across systems, the insurer's control story gets shorter and cleaner to demonstrate.
Against Florida
Florida's rules care about safeguarding personal information, managing breach risk, and responding well when things go wrong. Our answer is structural. The data isn't spread across multiple systems. Access is scoped inside the workflow. Every interaction is logged with enough detail to support an investigation.
If an incident happens, you're not reconstructing a timeline from seven different log sources. That changes what a breach response looks like in practice.
Against NY DFS (23 NYCRR 500)
NY DFS weighs governance, access management, third-party risk, and auditability more heavily than the other two frameworks. The 2023 amendments pushed harder on board-level accountability and CISO requirements.
We're a defined third-party processing environment, not a loose collection of services. Access runs through documented roles and workflow stages. The audit trail is complete across workflow, data, and payments. And the evidence an auditor needs sits in one place — not stitched together from three or four systems that each hold part of the picture.
How to frame Paytia in your vendor risk review
All three frameworks require you to assess your third-party providers. Our position, in one line: Paytia is a contained environment for sensitive data handling that reduces the number of systems exposed to regulated data, and gives you visibility into how workflows, data, and payments move.
Translate that into the vendor assessment: we're a controlled processing environment under your direction, not an uncontrolled extension of your own infrastructure. If your questionnaire is written around the second assumption, we'll fail questions that don't apply. If it's written around the first, we'll have clear answers to almost all of it.
Need this in a specific format for your compliance team, or have questions about a particular deployment? Contact us.