How conveyancing firms running Closer in LEAP automate client identity verification: deepidv posts the outcome to the LEAP matter via Zapier, no code needed.
A practical guide for conveyancing firms running Closer inside LEAP: how to have client identity verification run itself and post its outcome back to the matter, with no code, using deepidv and Zapier.
Conveyancing is where identity verification stops being paperwork and becomes the transaction's load-bearing wall. Property deals are the fraudster's favorite wire target, law societies impose client identification and verification duties on the lawyers running them, and the client is usually remote. Yet at most firms the check still travels by email: send a link, wait, screenshot the result, paste it somewhere near the file. For firms whose deals live in Closer in LEAP, that loop can now close itself.
Precision matters here, because it shapes what the automation can do. deepidv connects to LEAP, the practice management platform that Closer runs within, not to Closer directly. A Closer deal lives inside a LEAP matter, the client exists in LEAP as a card, and LEAP is what publishes a Zapier connector. So the verification outcome lands on the matter, which is exactly where the conveyancer, the file, and the audit trail already are.
One more piece of precision: LEAP's Zapier connector currently offers actions only, no triggers. Zapier cannot see a new matter open in LEAP, so opening a matter starts the verification is not how this build works. The automation runs in one direction, from deepidv into LEAP, and the trigger is the verification event itself. The firm sends the deepidv link at intake the way it already sends engagement letters; everything after the client taps it is automatic.
One Zap, five steps, running on the completed deepidv session:
| Step | Action | What it does |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Trigger: deepidv session completed | The verification outcome starts the automation |
| 2 | Filter on outcome | Route passes and failures differently, or post both with distinct wording |
| 3 | LEAP: Search Card (Exact Match on email, create if none) | Finds the client's card, or creates one so the outcome never falls on the floor |
| 4 | LEAP: Search Matter (Exact Match on file number) | Finds the matter the deal lives in |
| 5 | LEAP: Create Comment | Posts outcome, session ID, and date to the matter |
An optional sixth step uses LEAP's Create Cost Recovery action to bill the verification to the file automatically, which turns a compliance cost into a recorded disbursement in the same pass. Dates go in as ISO format and file numbers as plain digits, which saves an hour of debugging later.
Note what step 5 is: a comment on the matter, with the outcome, the session identifier, and the date. The full evidence record, the liveness result, document forensics, and session detail, stays in deepidv, retrievable by that session ID whenever a regulator or insurer asks. The comment is the pointer in the file; the vault is behind it.
Suggested read: Customer due diligence, explained
Step 4 searches for the matter by LEAP file number, which means the file number has to be inside the deepidv session before the client completes it. The fix is an intake habit, not a technical one: when staff create the verification session, they capture the LEAP file number into it as the reference. Firms that skip this end up with verified clients and orphaned outcomes, because a Zap cannot post to a matter it cannot name. Make the file number a required field in the session template and the problem never exists.
Three honest boundaries. First, there is no automated path for Closer without LEAP: a firm running Closer standalone manages verifications in the deepidv dashboard, which still beats the email loop but is not this integration. Second, the result posted to LEAP is a comment, not a report filed into the matter, for the reasons above. Third, deepidv is not the only verification option in Closer's orbit, and this is not an exclusivity story. The case for deepidv is what happens inside the session: passive liveness that catches the replayed face, deepfake defense built for the era when the client on a video call may be rendered, and an evidence record built to be produced later, wired into the file with no code.
The build is an afternoon. Confirm the firm's LEAP subscription includes Zapier access, connect LEAP and deepidv in Zapier, and build the five steps above in order, testing Search Card and Search Matter with a real card and a dummy matter before wiring the trigger. Set the Exact Match option on both searches, since a fuzzy match posting an outcome to the wrong client's matter is the one failure mode this design must never have. Add the Cost Recovery step if the firm bills verifications to the file. Then update the intake checklist: every deepidv session gets the LEAP file number at creation. That single habit is most of the deployment.
Suggested read: UK AML crackdown: lessons for legal-sector verification
deepidv integrates with LEAP, the platform Closer runs within. Because every Closer deal lives in a LEAP matter, the verification outcome posts to the matter through LEAP's Zapier connector, which is where the conveyancing file and its audit trail already live.
Not currently: LEAP's Zapier connector offers actions only, with no triggers. The automation runs from deepidv into LEAP, so staff send the verification link at intake, and everything from the client's tap to the comment on the matter is automatic.
As a comment on the matter containing the outcome, the deepidv session ID, and the date, with the client's card found or created by email match. The full evidence record stays in deepidv, retrievable by that session ID.
A LEAP subscription with Zapier access, a deepidv account, and one intake habit: capturing the LEAP file number into each verification session, because the Zap locates the matter by that number. Setup is an afternoon of Zapier configuration, no code.
Yes. An optional Create Cost Recovery step in the same Zap records the verification as a disbursement on the matter automatically, so the compliance check and its billing entry land in one pass.
Go live in minutes. No sandbox required, no hidden fees.
An operational engineering analysis evaluating deepidv, CLEAR, and authID on sub-150ms response latency, device attestation, and deepfake prevention.
An operational engineering analysis evaluating deepidv, Persona, and Jumio on sub-150ms execution latency, device attestation, and deepfake interception.
A technical evaluation comparing deepidv against Veridas and Fourthline following their merger, focusing on eIDAS 2.0 readiness and sub-150ms execution.
