Why use Certaby instead of a spreadsheet + manual checks?

A manual workflow for one letting-agent client check looks like: open the UK Sanctions List search, paste the tenant name; open OpenSanctions, paste again to get PEP and adverse-media; open Companies House for the corporate landlord, walk the PSC tree by hand; open MHCLG EPC register for the property, look up the band; open the EA flood map, check the postcode; open Police.uk, check the area. That is six tabs, three free-text searches, and around 30-45 minutes of officer time per let. The output is a folder of screenshots and a row in a spreadsheet that nobody can hash-verify after the fact.

A Certaby Letting transaction runs the checks (sanctions, company owners, MEES, crime, flood, with PEP and adverse media as an add-on) in one place: £3.27 for a let with a tenant, a landlord and the property. The output is one signed certificate for the client file, with a SHA-256 hash plus a public verifier URL the regulator can hit from the certificate alone to confirm it has not been edited.

What that buys the firm:

1. Time. 30-45 minutes per let down to under a minute.
2. Audit defensibility. The hash + verifier means a regulator inspection in 6 years cannot say 'someone could have edited this'.
3. Cross-source coverage. One screen covers the UK, UN, EU and US sanctions lists, where a manual check often stops at the UK list.
4. Property-risk overlay. Spreadsheet workflow rarely includes flood, MEES, or crime; the firms that ship those have a depth advantage.

For the firms doing it manually today, £3.27 a let is comfortably below the loaded officer time it replaces.

Last updated 9 May 2026.