Client cannot use the mortgage portal? Define an approved alternative

If a client cannot complete a mortgage administration task in your portal, give the assistant an approved alternative to coordinate. Define what the client still needs to do, how they can do it through a usable route, and how the resulting information will reach the file. Keep the unresolved portal issue separately owned.

A reminder to finish the same inaccessible step is not a complete response. Nor does an assistant completing a customer declaration on their behalf demonstrate that the customer could use the service. This guide proposes a role boundary and worked exercise for Australian brokerage owners, using fictional information rather than a real applicant's circumstances.

Identify the blocked task before choosing a format

Ask which step the person cannot complete and what way of working would help. Record the task and described barrier without turning the intake into a request for medical history. “I cannot reach the final question using my screen reader” gives the owner a specific problem to address. Do not infer that the client lacks decision-making ability or cannot provide the requested information.

The Australian Human Rights Commission's digital-access guidance describes an alternate access plan that provides a similar service while an access problem remains. It also discusses separate remediation planning and recording unresolved accessibility risks.

The Commission says its guidelines are not legally binding and relying on them does not necessarily protect against a finding of unlawful discrimination. The worksheet here is a suggested coordination tool, not a compliance assessment or approval of a particular workaround.

Name the brokerage owner who can approve the alternative and the person responsible for the system issue. The assistant needs an escalation route when the requested format, handling channel or deadline is outside the existing procedure.

Complete an alternative-access card

Keep the card with the existing task. The purpose is to connect a usable route to the original requirement, rather than create a second request list with a different definition of complete. An alternative can change the way the client participates without silently changing the information sought.

Fictional alternative-access card for a brokerage fact-find

Field	Mock entry	Support check
Original task	P-12: client answers and reviews the brokerage's factual questionnaire.	Identify the current questionnaire version and the expected customer action.
Reported barrier	Client cannot operate the final controls with their screen reader.	Record the affected step; do not diagnose a software cause or the client.
Requested route	Client asks for a readable text version they can review independently.	Return the request to the owner for format and handling approval.
Approved alternative	Owner supplies version P-12B through the agreed controlled route.	Compare question coverage with P-12 before delivery.
Customer action	Client reviews, corrects and confirms their own responses through the approved process.	Do not turn staff data entry into customer confirmation.
Source record	Returned P-12B and the client's corrections remain identifiable.	Link the entry task to its actual source and version.
Client completion	Owner reviews whether this factual-information task is complete.	Keep other application requirements separately visible.
System issue	Operations owner retains ticket A-04 and the next vendor review date.	Do not close the issue merely because P-12B was returned.

Connect the card to the document-request tracker where the task involves requested material. If routine reminders need to change, use the owner's instruction and record that change. Do not label the client unresponsive when the recorded obstacle is access.

Copy the alternative-access card

For a new task, fill in: [original task and version]; [reported barrier]; [requested route]; [owner-approved alternative and handling route]; [customer action still required]; [source and version]; [client-task owner and completion evidence]; [separate system-issue owner and next review]. Record the practical barrier, not a medical history. Keep this card linked to the existing task.

Complete the client's task through the approved route

In this fictional exercise, the owner checks P-12B against the original questionnaire and corrects an omitted question before delivery. The client can navigate the corrected version, answers it, changes one response and confirms their own final version. The assistant links the entry work to that corrected source. If the format remains unusable, the assistant returns the task to the owner; a sent file does not establish access.

The owner accepts this factual-information task as complete. A separate lender identity step remains outstanding with the responsible broker. The assistant neither marks the whole application complete nor invents an identity-document channel. The distinctive next decision is what happens to P-12 after completion while its linked portal issue is still unresolved.

Use the lender's route for lender-controlled documents

Some alternatives need to come from the organisation that owns the document or process. For example, CommBank says customers can request statements and other documents, including loan contracts, in alternative formats such as e-text. That is a specific bank option, not a promise that every lender offers the same formats.

Where a lender document is involved, assign the assistant only the approved coordination task: locate the current published route, prepare the internal request, or track the requested format. Do not ask them to recreate a loan contract, remove clauses, choose an alternative identity check or sign for the client. The responsible owner confirms what the actual process permits.

If the returned item has a technical defect, the unreadable-document workflow helps describe that defect precisely. Keep the two questions separate: can the client use the service, and has the required usable item actually arrived?

Close the client task and system issue on different evidence

Continue the same fictional case with a completed disposition record. P-12 belongs to the brokerage owner reviewing the client's factual information. A-04 belongs to the operations owner investigating the affected portal controls. The assistant maintains their links and follows each owner's instructions; one status must not overwrite the other.

Two-record key: P-12 is the customer questionnaire; P-12B is its approved alternative version. A-04 is the separate portal defect. The following four events are fictional.

1. Accept the customer's alternative

Event and evidence: Owner accepts returned P-12B after reviewing the client's corrected final version and confirmation.

Customer questionnaire: Closed for the factual questionnaire. Assistant stops only its completion reminders under the owner's instruction; the separate identity task remains visible.

Portal defect: Open. Operations owner retains the affected-step description, investigation owner and agreed next review date. Customer completion supplies no evidence of a portal repair.

2. Check the vendor's repair claim

Event and evidence: Vendor reports that release R7 changes the affected controls. No brokerage recheck has yet occurred.

Customer questionnaire: Stays closed. The client is not asked to repeat accepted answers just to test the vendor's claim.

Portal defect: Awaiting recheck. Owner assigns a controlled test using synthetic answers, the agreed access method and the deployed release identifier. The approved alternative remains available.

3. Keep a failed recheck open

Event and evidence: Recheck record shows the final control is reachable, but the tester still cannot review the answers before confirmation through that access method.

Customer questionnaire: Stays closed; P-12B remains the accepted source.

Portal defect: Open after failed recheck. Owner returns the precise unfinished step to the vendor and records the next action. A partial improvement does not satisfy this exercise's agreed task.

4. Accept only the tested defect

Event and evidence: After release R8, the assigned reviewer records successful navigation, answer review, correction, confirmation and receipt for the affected task using the agreed test. Operations owner accepts that scoped result.

Customer questionnaire: Stays closed. Its evidence remains the client's earlier P-12B, not the synthetic test.

Portal defect: Closed for the tested defect. Owner records the release, test conditions and accepted result, and authorises the standard route for future relevant tasks. That decision does not certify the whole portal or every person's access needs.

The recheck entry needs an attributable result, not just “tested”: who performed it, which version and access method they used, the sequence they attempted, what happened and who accepted the conclusion. The operations owner chooses an appropriate reviewer and test; the assistant does not certify accessibility or promise a vendor delivery date. Any evidence shared with a provider follows the approved process. The synthetic reproduction avoids using the client's financial answers as test data.

Now reverse the timing as a hiring exercise. Suppose the defect is repaired and accepted before the client has returned P-12B. A-04 can close on its own evidence while P-12 still awaits the client's action. A system repair does not supply their answers or confirmation. The owner agrees the next usable route with the client rather than automatically withdrawing the alternative or moving them into a new workflow.

If the same barrier is reported again, record the new observation against the relevant client task and return A-04 to its owner for a decision about reopening or a linked investigation. Preserve the earlier result and its limits. Do not erase accepted customer work or label the new report resolved solely because an older test passed.

Put the bounded duty in the hiring brief

Describe the work as coordinating approved alternatives, maintaining source records and following through on two separately owned tasks. Specify the formats the worker may prepare, the systems they may use and who is available to approve exceptions.

A fictional two-task exercise tests whether the worker can explain why customer completion and a vendor fix may occur in either order, with different evidence and owners. It should not ask a candidate to diagnose disability, assess legal compliance or design a lender workaround. You can discuss an assistant role with clear client-coordination boundaries once those responsibilities are defined.