Licensing Readiness Audit

Who this audit serves

Operators who already have draft policies and a product map, yet need an independent reader to test whether examiners will find coherent evidence. Typical clients include remittance firms, stored-value programmes, and payment facilitators approaching FSC-facing filings or investor diligence that mirrors supervisory questions.

Result you receive

A findings memo that lists control strengths, material gaps, and the evidence still missing from working papers. Severity ratings distinguish issues that should block filing from items that can be remediated on a dated plan. You leave with owners, deadlines, and a short appendix of sample exceptions for the compliance committee.

Scope of work

We examine customer due diligence files, transaction monitoring escalation notes, safeguarding or float reconciliations where relevant, complaint registers, outsourcing registers, and board minutes that show oversight of the compliance programme. Product marketing claims are checked against disclosed risks. Information security is reviewed only as far as governance artefacts and incident logs affect licensing narratives — we do not perform penetration testing.

Process

1. Intake — Confirm licence class, entities in scope, and examination or filing dates.
2. Document pull — Issue a tailored request list; you appoint a single evidence coordinator.
3. Fieldwork — Sample files, interview owners, and walk settlement or onboarding paths.
4. Draft findings — Share a draft memo for factual correction only.
5. Closing conference — Align remediation owners and residual risks before final issue.

Preparation we ask of you

Nominate a compliance contact with authority to book interviews. Provide read-only access to policy repositories and sample customer files under a confidentiality schedule. Disclose known regulatory correspondence already in flight so our sampling does not collide with open supervisory questions.

Constraints

We will not alter your policies during fieldwork. If critical evidence is withheld, the memo states limitations rather than inventing comfort. Parallel legal counsel remains your responsibility for application drafting.