Prepare filing data
Extract and check loan, debtor and secured-party information before form preparation.
UCC Filing Automation
UCC Filing Automation
Connect lending records, state filing workflows and attorney invoice processing in one controlled operation. Xalta automates data preparation, configured portal submissions and acknowledgment tracking, with validation and review at the points your team defines. Reduce repeated entry, make unresolved work visible and keep filing activity linked to the source loan.
Execute state workflows
Populate the configured form and follow the approved state portal or attorney handoff.
Track acknowledgments
Link returned references, filing status and unresolved responses to the originating request.
Process attorney invoices
Validate invoice transactions and route approved entries to the ERP using posting rules.
Lending operations
Challenges
A filing request depends on information and decisions spread across lending systems, legal operations, state portals and third-party firms. When those handoffs are managed manually, operations teams spend time checking, re-entering and chasing work instead of resolving the cases that need their judgment.
Repeated data entry
Loan and party information is copied from source records into documents, filing forms and follow-up logs. Differences between those copies create avoidable correction work and make it harder to establish which record is current.
Operational impact: more preparation, checking and rework.
State-specific processing
State forms and portal journeys vary. Teams must translate the same business request into the right submission steps, track the response and keep local operating knowledge available as people and workloads change.
Operational impact: inconsistent handling and dependence on individual operators.
Exceptions without ownership
Missing fields, conflicting source information and incomplete portal responses interrupt the normal flow. Without a work item, assigned owner and recorded resolution, requests can stall between teams or be resubmitted before their status is understood.
Operational impact: longer queues and repeated follow-up.
Disconnected filing and invoice records
Filing references, supporting documents, attorney invoices and ERP transactions are often maintained separately. Teams reconstruct the history to answer status questions, review a charge or investigate an unresolved item.
Operational impact: fragmented visibility across the loan and filing lifecycle.
UCC Filing Automation
How It Works
Each request moves through a defined sequence with a source reference, a recorded processing state and a clear next action. Filing execution and attorney invoice processing share the relevant loan context while retaining their own validation and review rules.
Prepare & validate
Identify an eligible request in the lending system or ERP. Extract the required loan, debtor, secured-party and supporting document information, then apply completeness and consistency checks. Route unresolved data to the responsible reviewer before preparing the filing.
Route & submit
Select the configured jurisdiction and filing action, populate the required form and carry out the approved portal steps. Where the operating model uses an attorney, route the prepared request through the agreed handoff. Apply the client-defined approval gate before submission.
Confirm & record
Capture available acknowledgments, returned filing references and supporting records. Update the originating work item and source system with the agreed status. Keep pending or ambiguous responses visible for review rather than treating a completed portal interaction as a confirmed filing outcome.
Validate invoices
Retrieve attorney invoice information from the agreed channel and validate transactions against the client’s business and accounting rules. Use the relevant loan or filing reference for matching where available. Post approved entries to the ERP and send non-conforming items to review, with transaction-level status and audit records.
Solution capabilities
Solutions
Reusable extraction, form-generation and status-monitoring components provide the foundation. Source connections, jurisdiction-specific steps, validation rules and review responsibilities are configured for your operation. The result is a defined filing workflow with explicit handling for work that cannot proceed automatically.
Reusable extraction and client field mapping
Filing-ready source data
Capture required information from the agreed lending system, ERP or source documents. Map the fields into a consistent work item while retaining the originating loan reference and supporting record. Document intelligence supports extraction where information arrives in forms or other documents; required fields and review thresholds are defined during configuration.
Operational example
Prepare a filing record from a loan event without retyping the same party information into each step.
Jurisdiction and filing-action configuration
State filing execution
Generate the supported state-specific form and perform the configured portal journey for the agreed filing action. Separate reusable preparation and orchestration from state-specific submission logic so additional jurisdictions can be assessed and introduced without rebuilding the complete workflow.
Operational example
Configure new-filing or termination steps for the state portals included in the deployment.
Client-defined rules and review gates
Validation & human review
Apply agreed completeness, source-consistency and business-rule checks before work progresses. Present a flagged item with the relevant source context and reason for escalation. Record the reviewer’s decision so corrected work can return to the workflow with a clear processing history.
Operational example
Refer an incomplete debtor record to the named operations owner before submission.
Reusable tracking and source-system updates
Acknowledgments & filing records
Capture available portal responses, returned references and supporting documents, then connect them to the originating request. Distinguish requests that have been submitted from those whose outcome has been confirmed, and retain unresolved responses for operational reconciliation.
Operational example
Link the acknowledgment and returned filing reference to the source loan record.
Configured ownership, reporting and recovery
Exceptions & operational visibility
Keep missing data, failed validations, portal interruptions and unresolved outcomes visible as assigned work. Define status categories, escalation paths and operating views around the team responsible for the filing portfolio. Agree recovery rules so a retry follows a reconciled processing state.
Operational example
Separate a portal interruption from a rejected or incomplete filing response when allocating follow-up.
Connected invoice and ERP configuration
Attorney invoice processing
Retrieve invoice information, validate transaction lines against the client’s business and chart-of-accounts rules, and send approved entries to the ERP. Route non-conforming items to review. Matching invoice activity to the relevant loan or filing record, where required, is configured as part of the connected accounts-payable scope.
Operational example
Post approved attorney invoice entries while retaining the validation outcome and transaction audit history.
Systems and operating scope
Integrations & Configuration
The documented Republic Finance implementation connects an on-premises ERP with state UCC portals and attorney invoice workflows. For your deployment, Xalta confirms the source interfaces, portal access, document locations, filing actions and review requirements before agreeing the integration and execution approach.
Reusable foundation. Defined configuration.
The framework reduces repeat engineering around the core process. Your systems, jurisdictions and operating controls determine the configuration and any additional development.
| Workstream | Reusable components | Client configuration | Additional scope |
|---|---|---|---|
| Source data and documents | Extraction, field mapping and a source-linked work-item structure. | Source-system access, required fields, document types and validation thresholds. | New applications, unfamiliar document structures or additional intake channels. |
| State filing workflow | Form generation, workflow orchestration and status-monitoring components. | Jurisdictions, supported filing actions, portal steps, approval gates and fee handling. | Additional states, filing channels or lifecycle actions outside the initial scope. |
| Review and recovery | Exception capture, decision records and workflow action history. | Review ownership, escalation, resubmission controls, retention and operating status definitions. | Bespoke review applications, extended control requirements or new reporting destinations. |
| Attorney invoices and ERP | Invoice retrieval, rule-based validation, exception routing and posting patterns. | Attorney input formats, transaction rules, accounting mappings and ERP posting results. | Additional attorney channels, specialised matching rules or wider accounts-payable processes. |
System access
Agree the execution environment, service identities, network permissions and approved access to each source, portal and document repository.
Operational rules
Provide the supported jurisdictions, filing instructions, required checks, approval responsibilities and accounting rules for the initial scope.
Testing and release
Supply representative and exception scenarios. Agree how portal testing, controlled batches, acceptance evidence and recovery procedures will be managed.
Applied to lending workflows
Use Cases
Apply the framework where a lending event must become a filed document, an updated record or an approved attorney invoice. The initial scope can focus on one defined workstream, then extend through reusable extraction, preparation and status-monitoring components.
Use case
New filingsFrom loan data to submission
Prepare the filing record, apply checks and execute the configured state journey, with the response linked back to the source request.
Use caseUse case
TerminationsFrom eligible contract to action
Identify contracts requiring a termination and move the approved instruction through the agreed form, portal and status workflow.
Use caseUse case
Attorney APFrom invoice to ERP entry
Retrieve invoice transactions, apply business and accounting rules, post approved entries and retain exceptions for review.
Use caseDocumented implementation · Financial services
Republic Finance
UCC filings and attorney invoices connected to the ERP.
Operating context
Republic Finance managed thousands of individual loans alongside state UCC submissions and invoices from third-party attorney firms. Repetitive transcription and inconsistent manual handling added effort across both back-office workstreams.
Implementation
Xalta integrated the automation with the client’s on-premises ERP. The filing workflow identified contracts requiring a new filing or termination, extracted the relevant data, populated state-specific forms and submitted through the relevant portals. In parallel, attorney invoice transactions were validated and posted using predefined business and accounting rules, with non-conforming items routed for human review.
Documented outcomes
- Reduced manual effort across the filing and attorney invoice workflows.
- Reduced processing errors through standardised data entry and rule-based posting.
- Faster, more consistent processing, with reusable extraction, form-generation and status-monitoring components.
Delivery and operations
Implementation & Support
Begin with a defined filing or invoice workstream and a measurable operating baseline. Configure the agreed connections and controls, validate representative scenarios with your team, then release in controlled stages. Monitoring, exception ownership and change handling form part of the handover.
Assess the operation
Map the request sources, filing actions, jurisdictions, exception patterns and attorney invoice dependencies. Establish the initial scope, operating owners and measures for preparation effort, processing time, queue age and rework.
- Xalta delivers
- Process map, dependency assessment, scope and acceptance measures.
- Your team provides
- Process owners, representative records, filing instructions and current performance information.
Acceptance checkpoint
The initial workstream, responsibilities and acceptance criteria are approved.
Configure the workflow
Connect the agreed sources, map the required data and configure forms, portal journeys, validation rules and invoice posting logic. Establish reviewer access and define the operating states used to track completed and unresolved work.
- Xalta delivers
- Configured connections, workflow rules, review points and operating documentation.
- Your team provides
- Approved access, source mappings, accounting rules and named reviewers.
Acceptance checkpoint
The configured workflow is ready for agreed normal and exception scenarios.
Validate & release
Run representative and exception scenarios, reconcile source records with submission and posting results, and complete user acceptance testing. Agree controlled batches where portal test facilities are limited, then train users and stage the release.
- Xalta delivers
- Test evidence, reconciliation results, release plan and user walkthroughs.
- Your team provides
- Business review, user acceptance decisions and release authorisation.
Acceptance checkpoint
Agreed scenarios pass and the operational team accepts the release conditions.
Support & improve
Monitor execution and unresolved work, review recurring exceptions and assess changes to portals, input formats and business rules. Manage enhancements and wider rollout against the agreed support and change process.
- Xalta delivers
- Monitoring, incident triage and change handling within the contracted scope.
- Your team provides
- Operational ownership, incident context and approval of material changes.
Acceptance checkpoint
Support ownership, escalation and change responsibilities are established.
Documented client work
Case Studies
A direct lending implementation and related document-processing projects show how extraction, validation, system integration and operational review work together.
Financial services · Lending operations
UCC filing and attorney invoices
Connected to the ERP
Republic Finance implementation
New-filing and termination workflows combined reusable data extraction, state-specific forms and portal submission. A connected attorney invoice process applied business rules and routed non-conforming transactions for review.
Read case study
Oil & gas · Accounts payable
Vendor invoice processing
70% less manual effort
Reported for the documented client workflow
Document extraction, vendor-specific rules and accounting entries connected DocVue with OGSQL/OGSYS. The implementation reduced human effort while retaining validation, approval and fallback handling.
Read case study
Healthcare · Revenue cycle operations
EOB payment posting
Scanned EOBs to EDI 835
Documented remittance automation
OCR and document extraction normalised payer remittances for validation and reconciliation. Transaction balancing, adjustment mapping and exception routing supported downstream claims and payment-posting workflows.
Read case studyPlanning your deployment
FAQs
Key questions about filing coverage, integration, operating controls and the scope of implementation.
What does the solution automate?
The solution supports source-data preparation, document extraction, validation, configured state filing steps, acknowledgment tracking and operating records. Attorney invoice retrieval, transaction validation and ERP posting can be included as a connected workstream. Your implementation scope identifies the filing actions, jurisdictions, source systems and review gates that will be automated.
What is reusable, and what needs configuration?
Extraction, form generation, orchestration and status-monitoring components provide the starting point. Configuration covers your source fields, document formats, state-specific forms and portal journeys, validation rules, reviewer responsibilities and ERP mappings. New connections, filing actions or specialised capabilities outside the agreed scope are assessed separately.
Which states and filing actions are supported?
Coverage is confirmed against your required jurisdictions and actions during scoping. The documented Republic Finance workflow included new filings and terminations through the relevant state portals. Each required portal journey and any additional lifecycle action is assessed, configured and tested before it is included in your operational scope.
Can it connect to our existing lending platform or ERP?
Xalta’s documented implementation integrated with an on-premises ERP. For your environment, the team assesses available interfaces, data locations, permissions and execution constraints. The proposal defines how records are read, how filing or posting results return to the source system, and which dependencies or additional connections need to be addressed.
What happens when information is missing or a portal fails?
The workflow records the issue, retains the request’s processing state and assigns the next action to the agreed owner. Reviewers receive the relevant source context and reason for escalation. Recovery and retry rules are defined during implementation so the team reconciles the submission outcome before repeating an action that may already have completed.
How are access, approvals and audit records handled?
Deployment design defines approved identities, permissions, credential handling, document retention and reviewer responsibilities for your environment. Workflow actions, review decisions and available responses are retained according to the agreed operating requirements. Your designated team supplies and authorises the filing instructions; automation executes the configured steps and escalates work outside those rules.
Can attorney invoice processing be included?
Yes. The Republic Finance implementation combined UCC filing with attorney invoice automation. Invoice transactions were interpreted and posted using predefined business rules and chart-of-accounts logic, with non-conforming items sent for human review. Your scope defines the attorney channels, input formats, reference matching, validation rules and ERP posting requirements.
What determines implementation cost and ongoing support?
The commercial scope reflects source connections, jurisdictions, filing actions, document formats, processing volumes, validation rules, exception handling and reporting needs. Support arrangements define monitoring, incident ownership, portal-change handling and enhancements. Third-party platform costs, filing-office fees and transaction charges are identified separately where applicable.
Discuss your filing workflow
Contact Us
Bring a representative filing request, your source-system landscape and the jurisdictions you need to support. We will walk through the operating flow, identify the reusable components and define the configuration, review controls and implementation scope.