In-person vs remote at signer level - Emails

Hi Michael,

 

Thanks for your suggestion, "Have the ability to selectively disable/enable emails at the transaction level per recipient" is an existing enhancement request, therefore I would like to vote on behalf of your organization on this feature.

 

Duo

 

 

Hi Duo. Has there been any movement on this? We have had more customers complaining about the amount of emails they get.

Thanks

 - J

Was going to create a post for this but then found this request and thought I would add on here. 

I would like to 'upvote' this as well, though maybe in a slightly different way.  We would love to see the API add the ability for us to provide a flag at the point of transaction send which instructs OneSpan not to automatically send any emails for that particular transaction.  Currently this is an account level setting I believe, but dropping this down to a transaction level would greatly increase the flexibility of how we can integrate internally, especially around more interesting use cases involving in person signers who would normally sign with an employee guiding them but would grant that employee the flexibility to trigger a send of the invite email if for some reason the person can't be there in person.  This flag could be on the transaction level or on a per signer level, in line with the original request here, either way would work for our needs.

Thanks!

Ron

Hi Ron,

 

For in-person signing transactions, there's a backoffice flag "Disable InPerson Activation Email" which suppresses in-person activation emails at the account level. At the same time, you can still programmatically notify recipients using "email.notify" template. This backoffice flag can be configured via support team.

In terms of the Enhancement Request, let me vote on behalf of your organization in the road map system.

 

Duo

Indeed, and we use that feature for our use cases. We request that the inperson emails be disabled and then rely on API calls to trigger the send at the point the signer is interacting with their banker and the banker needs to send the invite. However, this requires us to setup (2) separate accounts in OneSpan to be able to handle this as well as use cases where the business wants invites going out immediately upon sending. By allowing control at the transaction level as to whether OneSpan will send emails it means less admin and account work and coordination (for example, ensuring all customizations remain the same in both accounts). Just throwing out a touch more context. Thanks for the vote!

As the original poster, I will reiterate we still would like this. Our use case is auto purchasing, where often one buyer is present, but the co-buyer (usually a spouse) is remote. I have to believe this is a fairly common use case. Mike