What Questions Banks Ask First When Getting Acquainted with VIEWAPP

When a bank first gets acquainted with VIEWAPP, it is interested not only in how the application looks and what functions it has. Far more important is understanding how well the technology will fit into existing processes, whether the results of a remote inspection can be trusted, and what will be required to launch the solution.

That is why the first questions usually arise not around the interface, but around practical tasks: how to protect against object substitution, who should conduct the inspection, what data the bank will receive, and how flexibly the solution can be adapted to its own processes.

Can you be confident that the client actually inspected the right object?

For a bank, it is not enough to receive photographs of an apartment or a car. It is important to understand that they show the actual object that serves as collateral, and that the materials were not prepared in advance or obtained from another source.

Therefore, one of the first questions concerns protection against substitution. For example, is it possible to film a neighboring apartment instead of the collateral one, or photograph the VIN of one car and the body of another?

In VIEWAPP, such scenarios use sequential photo and video steps, geotags and timestamps, as well as automated checks. For real estate, a continuous video walkthrough can be arranged from the address plaque to the object itself. For a car, one can start the video with the VIN, walk around the vehicle, and finish the recording with a repeated VIN capture. Additionally, the system detects signs of screen recording and GPS spoofing. If direct participation of a specialist is required during the process, an online video call can be connected: an expert sees the image from the client's camera in real time and prompts where to point the camera, which area to show, or how to change the angle. The video session can be recorded, individual frames can be saved in full resolution, and the client's geolocation can be captured.

Who should conduct the inspection?

The next practical question is who should be entrusted with this work in general.

When it comes to periodic monitoring of an already formed collateral portfolio, sending a bank employee to each object becomes a significant expense. In the remote scenario, the inspection can be carried out by the borrower, while the bank employee receives the result in the web cabinet and gets involved only where questions arise.

At the same time, it is important for the bank not to be limited to just a phone number. If the identity of the person filming needs to be confirmed, the scenario can be supplemented, for example, with a selfie with an ID against the background of the car.

This approach is especially relevant for monitoring: the object is already known to the bank, the initial valuation has been carried out, and the task of periodic inspection is primarily to confirm the presence of the collateral, its location, and its condition. It is monitoring in the presented format that is regarded as one of the most understandable scenarios for the remote format.

Can the technical condition of a car be assessed remotely?

For a car collateral loan, this question becomes fundamental. An external inspection can be organized remotely: show the VIN, the body, the interior, the odometer, the engine compartment, and record the engine start.

But a visual inspection does not replace a full technical diagnostics. During the discussion, the question separately arises as to whether this method can determine the condition of the suspension, the presence of internal faults, and other parameters that usually require specialized equipment and a technical specialist.

Here the boundary of the technology's capabilities is important: VIEWAPP records what can be seen and checked within a given scenario, but it does not turn an ordinary remote inspection into a car diagnostics at a specialized service center.

What happens if the bank changes the inspection scenario?

It is important for the bank that the digital process does not turn out to be a rigid scheme that cannot be changed without the involvement of developers.

Therefore, banks often ask: who configures the scenarios, can steps be added or removed, and what will happen to the solution already embedded in the banking application?

In VIEWAPP, the scenario is configured in the designer: the bank can change fields, steps, prompts, lists, and language versions. When using the SDK, schema changes are pulled from the server, so updating the scenario does not require releasing a new version of the mobile application.

Where will the data be stored and how will the solution integrate into the bank's infrastructure?

Even before the start of the project, the bank wants to understand not only the inspection process itself, but also how the technology will interact with its information systems.

Here questions arise about integration options, the transfer of photographs, form data and reports, as well as the placement of the system. VIEWAPP supports API, Web SDK, and Mobile SDK, and the operating model can be built as a cloud service with the transfer of results to the bank's systems. Technically, placement within the bank's infrastructure is also possible, but this option significantly increases the cost of implementation.

And, of course, how much will it cost?

After questions about the process, security, and integration, the most practical question arises — the economics of the solution.

It is important for the bank to understand not only the cost of a single inspection, but the entire model: does the price depend on the number of users, types of assets, integration methods, and are separate payments required for modifications and support?

In the proposed VIEWAPP model, the cost depends on the type of property and the total volume of inspections. Users and integrations are not charged separately, and the license includes API, SDK, anti-fraud, video inspection, scheduled updates, and other options.

As a result, the bank's first meeting with VIEWAPP usually comes down not to the question "what can the application do?" but to a far more practical one: can remote inspection be embedded into a specific banking process in such a way that the result can be trusted, while the process itself remains manageable and economically justified.

I would finish through the experience of working with banks, but without the overly promotional "that's why they choose us" — it is better to link it to the fact that banks' questions are well known to us and already taken into account in the product.

Experience working with banks — at the core of the product

VIEWAPP works with major banks and well understands what requirements arise for a financial institution during the transition to remote inspections. Therefore, the questions that come up at the first meeting are not theoretical for us: they are directly related to real banking processes and are already taken into account in the development of the solution.

That is precisely why VIEWAPP is chosen by banks for which it is important not just to obtain a digital tool for collecting photographs, but to embed secure inspections into their existing collateral management system — with the required level of control, flexibility of scenarios, and clear economics.