Banking / Fraud Prevention is where ERP discipline either begins or breaks.
Positive Pay File Submission and Exception Management looks operational from far away. In a real finance team, it is a chain of assertions: the right actor started the work, the required records existed, the control policy was applied, the state change was preserved, and the outcome can be explained later without rebuilding the transaction from emails and spreadsheets.
The expected business outcome is specific: Check fraud losses reduced to near-zero through systematic positive pay coverage on 100% of issued checks.
The control flow a finance team actually needs.
Step 1
Generate Positive Pay File Within 30...
Step 2
Bank-Specific File Formats Via...
Step 3
Transmit Via SFTP With PGP Encryption
Step 4
Alert AP Manager Of Pending Exceptions...
Step 5
Display Check Image Alongside Issued...
The ERP surface involved.
Module
Banking / Fraud Prevention
Actors
AP Manager, Bank Positive Pay Portal, Fraud Detection System
Tier
Tier 1
Finance area
Cash Management, Treasury & Banking
Region lens
US and UK finance teams
Publication date
March 28, 2026
Generate positive pay file within 30 minutes of check print completion; support bank-specific file formats via configurable template (delimiter, field order, date format); transmit via SFTP with PGP encryption; alert AP manager of pending exceptions within 15 minutes of bank notification; display check image alongside issued check data; enforce decision deadline timer (configurable, typically 4 hours); log every decision with user, timestamp, and reason; support bulk approve-all for low-risk exceptions below configurable dollar threshold; integrate stop payment instruction back to bank via API or file.
US and UK teams have different compliance hooks, but the same control problem.
US teams usually care about clean evidence for audit support, vendor records, payment controls, tax reporting, and management review. UK teams usually care about VAT-ready records, approval evidence, digital-record discipline, and traceable postings. The country-specific details differ, but the operating pattern is the same: the ERP needs controlled records, explicit ownership, defensible state changes, and evidence that survives beyond the person who completed the task.
The control matrix.
| Control area | Requirement | Acceptance proof |
|---|---|---|
| Control 1 | Generate positive pay file within 30 minutes of check print completion | Given a check print run has completed |
| Control 2 | support bank-specific file formats via configurable template (delimiter, field order, date format | when the positive pay file is generated and transmitted |
| Control 3 | transmit via SFTP with PGP encryption | then the file is produced within 30 minutes of print completion in the bank-specific format via SFTP with PGP encryption, and when the bank presents an unmatched check the exception appears in the ERP queue within 15 minutes with a side-by-side comparison and a configurable decision deadline |
| Control 4 | alert AP manager of pending exceptions within 15 minutes of bank notification | negative) when a decision deadline expires without AP manager action then the exception is escalated automatically and logged with timestamp. |
| Control 5 | display check image alongside issued check data | Check fraud losses reduced to near-zero through systematic positive pay coverage on 100% of issued checks. |
| Control 6 | enforce decision deadline timer (configurable, typically 4 hours | Check fraud losses reduced to near-zero through systematic positive pay coverage on 100% of issued checks. |
Audit evidence is a chain, not a folder.
| Evidence layer | What should be preserved |
|---|---|
| Business event | After each check print run the system automatically generates a positive pay file containing check number, amount, payee name, and issue date for every check issued. The file is transmitted to the bank via SFTP in the bank's required format (BAI2 addenda, custom CSV, or ANSI X9.100). When the bank presents a check for payment that does not match the positive pay file, it routes the exception to the ERP exception queue. The AP manager reviews each exception with side-by-side comparison of the presented check image and the issued check record. The manager approves payment or issues a stop payment instruction within the bank's decision window. The outcome is logged and the check record updated. |
| Control rules | Generate positive pay file within 30 minutes of check print completion; support bank-specific file formats via configurable template (delimiter, field order, date format); transmit via SFTP with PGP encryption; alert AP manager of pending exceptions within 15 minutes of bank notification; display check image alongside issued check data; enforce decision deadline timer (configurable, typically 4 hours); log every decision with user, timestamp, and reason; support bulk approve-all for low-risk exceptions below configurable dollar threshold; integrate stop payment instruction back to bank via API or file. |
| Acceptance proof | Given a check print run has completed; when the positive pay file is generated and transmitted; then the file is produced within 30 minutes of print completion in the bank-specific format via SFTP with PGP encryption, and when the bank presents an unmatched check the exception appears in the ERP queue within 15 minutes with a side-by-side comparison and a configurable decision deadline; (negative) when a decision deadline expires without AP manager action then the exception is escalated automatically and logged with timestamp. |
| Data record | |
| System event | |
| Lifecycle state | |
The useful version of this workflow is not only fast. It is inspectable. A controller, auditor, or operator should be able to move from source event to system record to state transition to final business outcome without guessing.
Implementation contracts.
Reference data model
`positive_pay_file` { file_id: string, bank_account_id: string, check_count: int, generated_at: timestamp, transmitted_at: timestamp, status: enum(GENERATED, TRANSMITTED, ACKNOWLEDGED), external_id: string }; `positive_pay_exception` { exception_id: string, bank_account_id: string, check_number: string, presented_amount_minor: int64, currency_code: char(3), decision: enum(PENDING, APPROVED, STOP), decided_by: string, decided_at: timestamp, external_id: string }; (reference, product may differ).API and events
`POST /v1/banking/positive-pay/files` { bank_account_id, check_run_id } -> 201 { file_id }; `GET /v1/banking/positive-pay/exceptions` { bank_account_id, status }; `POST /v1/banking/positive-pay/exceptions/{id}/decide` { decision, reason } -> 200; emits `banking.positive_pay_exception_created` and `banking.positive_pay_decision_recorded` events; idempotent via external_id.State transitions
`PENDING -> APPROVED | STOP`; terminal `EXPIRED` on deadline breach; guard: EXPIRED triggers automatic escalation.Common implementation traps.
Treating the workflow as data entry
If the ERP only stores the final record, the team loses the decision trail that explains how the record became valid.
Hiding exception logic
Exceptions need owners, reason codes, and time stamps. A vague pending state is not a control.
Posting without recovery design
Retries, duplicate submissions, and partial failures must be explicit so the system does not create inconsistent records.
Skipping evidence design
A workflow that cannot produce evidence on demand will eventually push finance teams back into manual screenshots and spreadsheets.
Where Rivane fits.
Rivane is built for finance workflows where automation must stay tied to source documents, approvals, state transitions, ledger impact, reporting, and audit evidence. Use this guide as a checklist for evaluating whether an ERP workflow is merely digitized or actually controlled.
References and source basis.
These sources provide the standards, regulatory, or government context around the flow. They are included so the guide is useful to finance operators, auditors, and implementation teams, not only buyers reading software copy.