LexAML: Client Onboarding, KYC & AUSTRAC Compliance
How GetPost Labs would build the AML/CTF compliance officer's workflow: new clients' identity documents, ownership and screening results read by AI agents, risk ratings and record keeping held by rules, and every higher-risk client decided by your compliance officer. The AUSTRAC record builds itself on the same trail.
Executive Summary
The Problem: Every new client has to be identified, screened for sanctions, politically exposed persons and adverse media, risk-rated and recorded before the work starts — and the Tranche 2 reforms bring more accounting and professional firms under the AML/CTF Act. The information arrives as scanned IDs, trust deeds and company extracts, so it is read, re-keyed and cross-checked by hand.
The Solution: LexAML gives the reading and screening summaries to AI agents, keeps the risk rating, record keeping and review dates as fixed rules in software, and leaves every higher-risk client and every reporting decision with the compliance officer. Onboarding, screening and the AUSTRAC record sit on one file.
The Outcome: The compliance officer reviews the clients that need judgement instead of re-keying every file, partners take on work knowing the checks are done, and each client keeps its own audit trail.
The Challenge
Understanding the problem space
"Conduct KYC, CDD and ECDD reviews, including beneficial ownership, PEP, sanctions and adverse media screening"
— A duty listed in a current Australian compliance officer job ad (SEEK, September 2026)
Onboarding and screening are the core of the role. Across 16 current AML compliance officer and client onboarding ads, the same duties come up again and again: onboard new clients, run KYC and customer due diligence, review higher-risk customers, maintain compliance records and registers, and assist with AUSTRAC reporting.
Most of that work is cross-checking information that already exists somewhere else — the ID documents, the company or trust structure, the screening results, the firm's own AML/CTF programme. When it lives across Xero Practice Manager, email and a spreadsheet, every file is assembled by hand, and one missed beneficial owner or out-of-date review becomes a gap an auditor will find.
Source: 16 AML compliance officer and client onboarding job ads in Australia on SEEK, September 2026. Employers not named.
The Solution
What GetPost Labs would build
Core Capabilities
Where the Time Comes Back
Judgement, not data entry
The compliance officer stops assembling each client file by hand and starts reviewing what the agent has flagged:
Beneficial Ownership
Open the company extract and the trust deed side by side, trace who ultimately owns or controls the client, type it into the file.
The agent has drawn the structure and listed the beneficial owners with the page each came from. The officer checks it, not builds it.
Sanctions, PEP & Adverse Media
Run each name through screening, read every possible match, write up why each one is or is not your client.
The agent summarises each result and flags the ones that look real. The officer decides; the reasons are saved with the file.
Records & Ongoing Reviews
Keep a spreadsheet of when each client was last checked and hope the next review is not missed.
A rule sets each client's review date from its risk rating, re-screens on schedule and keeps every record for the retention period.
BPMN Workflow
The business process modelled
New Client: Enquiry to Onboarded
User Journey
A New Client, Enquiry to Onboarded
Scenario: An accounting firm takes on a new client: a family trust with a corporate trustee, buying an investment property.
Uploads the directors' IDs, the trust deed and the company extract through the onboarding portal
Reads the documents, lists the trustee directors and beneficiaries, and summarises the sanctions, PEP and adverse-media results. Flags one director as a possible PEP match
Applies the firm's AML/CTF programme: a possible PEP match and a trust structure rate the client as higher risk, so it cannot proceed without the compliance officer
Drafts the source-of-funds questions for the property purchase and a one-page case summary with every source linked
Confirms the PEP match is a different person with the same name, and reviews the client's answers on the source of funds
Accepts the client with a note of the reasons. The partner is told the engagement can start
Identity, screening, rating and decision kept on one record, with the next review and re-screening dates set
Outcome: The client is onboarded with every check, flag and decision on one record. The agent prepared it; the compliance officer decided it.
Interactive Prototype
Functional dashboard demonstrating the concept
KYC Client Dashboard
Real-time client verification status • AML/CTF Tranche-2 Compliant
| Client ID | Name | Type | Risk | KYC Status | Last Check | Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CLI-1247 | Acme Corporation Pty Ltd | Corporate | Low | Verified | Today | |
| CLI-1246 | Smith Family Trust | Trust | Low | Verified | Today | |
| CLI-1245 | Johnson, Michael R. | Individual | Medium | In Progress | Pending | |
| CLI-1244 | TechStart Innovations | Corporate | Low | Verified | Yesterday | |
| CLI-1243 | Oceanview Holdings | Corporate | High | Review | Flagged |
© 2026 GETPOST Labs. Full Stack Engineering Solutions.
Functional prototype. Click on cells and entries to see interactions.
System Context
Where LexAML fits in the ecosystem
Have a Similar Problem?
This is the kind of workflow automation GetPost Labs builds. If your organisation has similar challenges, we'd love to discuss how a custom solution might help.