Call compliance monitoring that reviews every bank call and chat, pins each finding to the second it was said, and leaves every decision to a QA analyst
Every call and chat reviewed, not a sample, and each finding confirmed within a day.
See one case, screen by screen ↓Call compliance monitoring is how a bank checks what its bankers say on calls and chats for complaints, Regulation E notices of error, missed disclosures and UDAAP risk. Call Compliance Monitoring reviews every call and chat instead of a sample: agents transcribe, redact, check the rules for each call type and verify every flag, and a QA analyst confirms or dismisses each finding.
AI use cases in banking: a buyer's guide to agentic AI for bank and credit union operations →
Updated
Call compliance monitoring is how a bank checks what its bankers say on calls and chats: whether a complaint was logged, whether a Regulation E notice of error was taken, whether a fee, a hold or a protection was stated accurately, and whether the statements each call type requires were made. Most banks still do it by sampling one or two percent of calls by hand. At Corvane National Bank, the demo bank, QA listened to 8 calls per banker a month, about 1.5% of what was said, and a dispute said on the other 98.5% starts a 10-business-day clock nobody sees.
Bankers log only the complaints customers name as complaints, while the bank's policy counts any expression of dissatisfaction. One wrong knowledge article can put the same misleading advice on dozens of calls before a sample finds it. Keyword tools flag thousands of harmless phrases, so reviewers skim. Call Compliance Monitoring puts seven agents in front of every call and chat, with a verifier that removes false positives, so a QA analyst spends the day deciding, not listening.
Estimated, for one finding on one call: the 'before' column follows the monthly sample, the email to the supervisor, the case entered by hand and the monthly pattern report described in the working solution's design; the 'after' column is the overnight review, a decision the next day and the nightly pattern search. Our arithmetic, kept modest.
Seven agents review every call and chat and a verifier re-reads each flag; a QA analyst confirms and the manager checks.
Denise H. called Corvane National Bank's Consumer Card Services on Tuesday, October 20, 2026 at 14:06: call 26-1020-58813, 7 minutes 48 seconds, with banker Tyler Brandt of Team 14 in Columbus. Here is what happened to it, screen by screen, in the working solution.
On October 20 the agents reviewed 98,412 calls and 17,606 chats. The Listening agent transcribed and redacted them, the Complaint and Rules agents raised 1,426 flags, and the Verifier agent removed 1,008 of them, so 418 reached the QA team.
27 findings on 22 calls and chats, 3 to act on today.
Alana's queue opens on Act on today, and Denise H. is first. The whole call is one waveform, colored by who is speaking, with pins labeled by rule at 1:58, 3:12, 4:26 and 6:40, a hollow pin at 5:22, and green ticks where the recording notice, authentication and closing were made.
At 3:12 Denise says she never made a $412.60 charge at Brightline Electronics, and the banker answers that she needs to call the merchant first. The rule in plain words sits beside the excerpt, the Rules agent at 98% and the Verifier at 99%, and citation 1 opens 12 CFR 1005.11(b)(1) with the words that matter highlighted.
A banker never tells a customer to contact the merchant first, visit a branch, sign an affidavit or file a police report before the bank investigates.
The Rules agent flagged "I can send you a new card, there's no fee for that" as a fee statement. The verifier read the consumer fee schedule, where a replacement debit card with standard delivery is $0, and removed it. The hollow pin stays visible with the reason, and Alana can restore it as a finding.
Rules agent 72%, verifier 31%.
Alana confirms the notice of error missed at 3:12. The notice date is Tuesday, October 20, the day of the call, not today: investigate by Tuesday, November 3 (10 business days, 9 left), or, if credited provisionally, by Monday, January 18, 2027, the 90-day limit for a point-of-sale debit card. Changing the notice date needs a reason and the Card Disputes lead.
The Case agent opens Reg E claim DSP-26-118204 for Card Disputes with October 20 as the notice date, remediation REM-26-0431 for the claim acknowledgment letter, which a second person approves, and coaching COA-26-7742 for Jordan Pike, the Team 14 supervisor. The 3:12 pin on the waveform turns to a check.
No case opens before a person confirms.
On the cases screen the new claim waits for Card Disputes, due November 3. Victor accepts it, checking the notice date against the call excerpt in the case drawer, beside the other open cases from confirmed findings: a complaint, a UDAAP issue with a lookback proposed, an elder referral and an SCRA referral.
The Pattern agent found the same advice on 37 calls since October 1, by 11 bankers at 3 sites, all after knowledge article KB-CARD-118, written for credit card disputes, was linked to debit card questions on September 28. The lookback preview finds 214 calls, 163 customers with no claim, $41,870 disputed and 51 past 90 days; it opens nothing until Rosalind approves, and the Chief Compliance Officer is told of a possible self-identified issue.
Jordan sees only confirmed findings for his team: Tyler's excerpt at 3:12 and a note drafted from card dispute procedure CARD-DSP-02, which says the knowledge article was wrong for debit cards and gives the words that work. He edits it, sends it and books a 1:1 for Thursday at 10:30.
Agents never rate, discipline or report a banker.
The confirmation, the claim the Case agent opened, the source Alana read and the lookback preview are on an audit trail kept five years. The export pack for an OCC examination, July 1 – September 30, 2026, holds 19,240 findings with decisions and excerpts and 1,402 Reg E claims, with customer names and account numbers redacted, and goes out only when Gregory releases it.
The same call, seen by the people who decide, check, coach and own the case: what their day looked like, and what it looks like now.
Seven agents review every call and chat and a verifier re-reads each flag; a QA analyst confirms and the manager checks.
Transcribes every call and reads every chat, separates the speakers, records the call type and whether the recording notice played, and redacts card numbers, security codes and SSNs.
Finds every expression of dissatisfaction the bank's Complaint Policy CP-3 counts as a complaint, whether or not the customer uses the word, and checks the complaint management system for a log.
Checks each call against the rules for its call type, comparing what was said with the fee schedule, hold notices, account records and procedures: notices of error, required statements, fees, holds, threats, referrals and card data.
Re-reads every flag against the whole call and its sources, on a second model family, and keeps it, removes it with a written reason, or disagrees and proposes a dismissal code.
On confirmation, opens the right case for the right owner: a Reg E claim or complaint dated the day of the call, a coaching note, a referral, a remediation or a technology case.
Finds the same finding across calls, bankers and sites, traces it to a knowledge article, an IVR change or a virtual-assistant answer version, and proposes fixes and lookbacks.
Draws the Compliance Monitoring Manager's check sample and pre-checks each decision against the evidence.
Confirms or dismisses with a reason. The agents propose; a named person decides.
The assistant answers about the calls and chats in the queue, the rules, the cases they opened and the patterns behind them, with every source cited, and then opens the screen.
What needs me before 5 pm today?
Three, all in Act on today: Denise H., a notice of error on a $412.60 charge, told to call the merchant first; Daniel F., a $600 ATM notice of error in chat, told to visit a branch and sign an affidavit; and Gloria P., 81, a $9,000 bail wire she was told to keep secret, which has not gone out yet.
Why did the verifier remove the pin at 5:22?
Because the banker was right. Tyler Brandt said a new debit card has no fee; the verifier read the consumer fee schedule, where a replacement debit card with standard delivery is $0, so it never reached the queue as a finding.
Which other calls told a customer to call the merchant first?
37 calls since October 1, by 11 bankers at all three sites, 9 of them on Team 14. They share one cause: knowledge article KB-CARD-118, written for credit card disputes, has also been linked to debit card questions since September 28. The pattern agent proposes a 90-day lookback and a fix to the article.
Draft the coaching note for Tyler Brandt
Drafted for Jordan Pike, his supervisor, from the confirmed findings only, with the words that work from the card dispute procedure. The note says the cause was partly the knowledge article, so it reads as coaching, not blame. Jordan edits and sends it; the assistant never sends coaching itself.
13 screens from the working solution, on its sample data. Pick one to see it large.
The thresholds, deadlines and protections every call is held to are settings. Each change is proposed by one person and approved by the Chief Compliance Officer, and the agents use it from the next call.
| Setting | Default | Choose from |
|---|---|---|
| Verifier minimum confidence to show a finding | 80% | Stepped; a change to 82% is waiting for approval |
| Removed by the verifier, sampled for QA | 2% | Stepped; changes need the Chief Compliance Officer |
| Manager check | 10% of confirmations, 100% of High dismissals | Stepped; nobody checks their own decisions |
| Review deadlines | Reg E notices and customers at risk the same business day; High 1, Medium 3, Low 5 business days | Escalates to the manager at 75% |
| Bulk decisions | Up to 50 | Low findings with one rule, cause and evidence only |
| Required statements | Six call types, 6 to 14 rules each | All-party consent states checked for the recording notice |
| Retention | Findings and evidence five years; recordings seven years | Reg E records at least two years (12 CFR 1005.13); recordings under records schedule RS-14 |
| Redaction | Card numbers, security codes and SSNs | In transcripts and the audio copy reviewers hear (PCI DSS 4.0); locked on |
Every figure is labelled: a target the solution is built to, an estimate, a typical published result, or a proven one.
Sources: 12 CFR 1005.11 (Regulation E error resolution: 10 business days, or 45 or 90 days with provisional credit) and 12 CFR 1005.13 (records) · Federal Reserve, Consumer Compliance Outlook, third issue 2025 (conditions on starting an investigation that examiners cite) · PCI DSS 4.0, requirement 3.3.1 · one to two percent of calls sampled by hand: commonly reported in industry and vendor reports · "demo" = seen in the working solution, on its sample data · "target" = design goal, measured in the live solution · "typical" = published figures and rules · "estimated" = our arithmetic, kept modest. Corvane National Bank, Brightline Electronics and the people, calls, cases and numbers named on this page are fictional: characters and sample data in the working solution.
Call compliance monitoring is how a bank checks what its bankers say on calls and chats for complaints, Regulation E notices of error, missed disclosures and UDAAP risk. Call Compliance Monitoring reviews every call and chat instead of a sample: agents transcribe, redact, check the rules for each call type and verify every flag, and a QA analyst confirms or dismisses each finding.
Yes. In the working solution's sample month the agents reviewed 2,104,380 calls and 381,920 chats. A separate Verifier agent re-read every flag against the whole call and removed 21,880 of 30,926 with a written reason, so 9,046 reached a person; removed pins stay visible, and 2% of removals are sampled for QA.
Under 12 CFR 1005.11, an oral or written notice that lets the bank identify the customer and the account and says why the customer believes there is an error, such as an unrecognized debit card charge. It starts the investigation clock; requiring the customer to contact the merchant, visit a branch or sign an affidavit first is a condition examiners cite. When a QA analyst confirms a missed notice, the Reg E claim opens with the call date as the notice date.
The Complaint agent applies the bank's complaint policy, which counts any expression of dissatisfaction whether or not the customer says the word complaint, and checks the complaint management system for a log. A confirmed complaint is logged with the call date as its received date, and its acknowledgment letter and closing each need a second officer.
The Listening agent redacts card numbers, security codes and SSNs from the transcript and the audio copy reviewers hear, and that setting is locked on. It never alters the original recording, so a code caught there stays only until a purge request is approved. PCI DSS 4.0 requirement 3.3.1 says the code is not kept after authorization, and asking for it on a recorded line is itself a rule the agents check.
No. Agents flag and propose; no case, claim or complaint opens before a person confirms, and every letter waits for a second approval. No agent rates, disciplines or reports a banker: supervisors see only confirmed findings for their own team, and bankers see only their own coaching.
Yes. A QA analyst decides every finding, with a reason code to dismiss or change one; the Compliance Monitoring Manager checks 10% of confirmations and every High dismissal; and rules, agent versions, settings and export packs need the Chief Compliance Officer. Nobody checks or approves their own work.
The Agentic Solution Engine builds and deploys it from your requirements and documents, such as your rule library, procedures, fee schedule and complaint policy, with a sample of your recorded calls and chats, and it goes live once every quality gate has passed. We will walk you through it on your own calls first.
Every request in a message on its own legal clock, started the day it arrives.
1-min demoATM & Branch Cash ForecastingSmaller, better-timed cash orders inside every vault limit, and no machine left empty.
1-min demoATM & Teller BalancingEvery shortage explained the same day, with the records that prove it attached.
1-min demoWe'll run Call Compliance Monitoring on a sample of your own recorded calls and chats.