Supplier records you can actually trust

They cause duplicate payments. Xelix analysed 1.2 million invoices across 187 ERP systems in 2025 and found duplicate payments at 0.22 percent of spend, with manual processing behind more than 60 percent of cases. On fifty million of spend that is around a hundred and ten thousand paid twice.

Usually the same supplier onboarded more than once under slightly different names, an abbreviation, a trading name, a trailing space, or a new contact raising a request without checking. It is rarely one bad process, it is the absence of anyone owning the file.

A change to bank details is never actioned by us. It is raised as an exception and verified out of band against a contact you nominated in advance, then approved by you. The FBI's IC3 recorded 2.77 billion dollars of business email compromise losses across 21,442 complaints in 2024, and this record is the usual entry point.

The person who can change a supplier's details is not the person who can process that supplier's invoices. Without it, one compromised or dishonest account can both create a fake supplier and pay it. We enforce it on our side as a matter of course.

The Association for Financial Professionals found 76 percent of organisations experienced attempted or actual payments fraud in 2025. It is close to universal, which is why the control matters more than the tooling.

The cleanup is a fixed fee, quoted after the free audit against the record count and how much verification each needs. Ongoing hygiene is either priced per record maintained or as a monthly dedicated seat.

No. Merges and deactivations are proposed with the evidence behind them, applied only against rules you approved beforehand, and logged so they can be reversed. Nothing is removed silently.

It depends on record count and how much external verification is needed, and the audit tells you before you commit. Active suppliers are always done first, so the records you actually trade with are correct early rather than last.

Both are available, and the honest answer is that a one-off cleanup starts degrading immediately. If nobody owns onboarding and change control afterwards, you will be buying the same cleanup again within a year or two.

Only if you have a data team to run it. Software gives you rules and workflow, but Ardent Partners found only 7 percent of organisations have fully automated supplier onboarding and 28 percent have none, which suggests tooling is rarely the binding constraint. People are.

SAP and SAP Ariba, Oracle, NetSuite, Microsoft Dynamics, Coupa, Sage, Xero, QuickBooks, Zoho and Tally. We work inside your system rather than exporting your supplier file somewhere else.

Legal entity and registration validation, tax identifier checks appropriate to the country, banking detail verification through an independent channel, duplicate screening against the existing master, and any sanctions or watchlist screening you require.

Access is scoped by you, granted to named people, and revoked through your own leaver process. We contract on standard clauses, name every sub-processor, and work to GDPR, UK GDPR, PIPEDA, the Australian Privacy Principles and Saudi PDPL. ISO 27001 alignment is in progress and SOC 2 Type II is on the roadmap. We state status honestly rather than showing badges we do not hold.

It varies, and the argument is part of why it goes unmaintained. Ardent Partners found 67 percent of Best-in-Class accounts payable teams have taken ownership themselves. We work to whichever owner you nominate, and having one named owner matters more than which function it sits in.

Yes. Start with active suppliers, or one entity, or just the records with missing banking data. Measure it against the audit baseline, then decide whether to widen the scope.