01
A Zero Balance System
LettsPay is designed not to build a standing, multi-agency pool of client money requiring continuous reconciliation. The operating focus is the transaction: what is due, what has arrived and what has been paid onward.
The LettsPay Branded Truth
Client money without the pooled balance.
LettsPay is a rent-collection and disbursement system designed around a Zero Balance System: money is managed according to what is due and what has been paid, without creating the multi-agency pooled balance found in an OSCA-P model.
Clear movement. Clear attribution. Exceptions made visible.
The intended movement of money
Tenant pays
→
Payment observed
Due identified
→
Paid onward
No pooled balanceto accumulate across agencies
The Branded Truth
What LettsPay actually is
It is not simply conventional client-account bookkeeping moved onto somebody else’s software. Its defining difference is architectural.
02
Independent of the property CRM
The CRM supplies what should be due. LettsPay independently observes what has been received and controls the instructed apportionment. One system does not simply mark the other system’s homework.
03
Payment infrastructure, not a pooled pot
Modulr provides payment infrastructure. Banking services are provided through Griffin. The model is intended to keep landlord funds attributable without sweeping multiple agencies’ money into one platform-owned pooled balance.
04
Exceptions, not hidden discrepancies
Routine transactions complete automatically. Where rent is late, short or cannot be completed, the item becomes an exception for active handling instead of disappearing inside a growing reconciliation problem.
Architectural principle
£0
No multi-agency pooled balance
“Zero balance” is not a ledger being made to look tidy while pooled cash rests elsewhere. It describes a system designed not to create that pooled balance in the first place.
Why the distinction matters
Due and paid—not a balance waiting to be explained.
A ledger or wallet can represent who money belongs to. That is not the same as the underlying cash being legally and operationally segregated. LettsPay’s design starts with the movement and attribution of each transaction.
- Rent due is identified from the agency’s records.
- Money received is observed independently.
- Instructed payments are apportioned to the relevant parties.
- Uncompleted items remain visible as exceptions.
The client-money taxonomy
Three models. One crucial difference.
“Outsourced” does not describe a single architecture. Where the balance sits, whose name it is held in and whether agencies are pooled together all matter.
| Model | Where the balance sits | What is pooled | Operational character |
|---|---|---|---|
| DECCA | An agency’s own client account | Multiple landlords within that agency | Established double-entry client cash accounting with a balance to reconcile. |
| OSCA-I | A third-party platform, separately for each agency | No commingling between agencies | Client cash accounting is outsourced but each agency remains structurally separate. |
| OSCA-P | A platform-owned pooled account | Multiple agencies, each representing multiple landlords | A second layer of pooling; attribution depends on sub-ledgers and reconciliation. |
| ZBS / LettsPay | No accumulating multi-agency pooled balance | The architecture is designed not to create the pool | Transaction-led: due, received, apportioned and paid, with exceptions surfaced. |
Operational picture
Automation where it should be. Attention where it matters.
The reported operating data describes a system in which the overwhelming majority of transactions complete routinely, leaving the team to work on genuine exceptions.
96.25%of transactions reported as completing automatically
3.75%reported as exceptions requiring active arrears handling
100kapproximately monthly transactions reported at the time of compilation
Evidence and restraint
What is established—and what still needs confirming.
A Branded Truth should make uncertainty visible. It should never turn an intended architecture into a regulatory endorsement that has not been given.
The intended system design
LettsPay describes its model as a Zero Balance System. Modulr provides payment infrastructure; Griffin provides banking infrastructure. The architecture is designed to avoid a multi-agency pooled balance.
ZBS is not OSCA-P
OSCA-P commingles multiple agencies’ client money in a platform-level pooled account. LettsPay’s defining architectural claim is that this pool is not created.
Precise legal account structure
The exact legal account-holder and beneficial-ownership structure at Griffin should be confirmed in definitive provider documentation before stronger legal claims are made.
Regulatory interpretation
No statement here claims that MHCLG, RICS, Propertymark or a CMP scheme has formally endorsed LettsPay’s particular structure. Open regulatory questions remain open.
Important: This page explains the available evidence and LettsPay’s stated architecture. It is not legal advice and does not replace formal confirmation from the relevant banking, legal or regulatory parties.