A name match needs more than exact spelling.

The EPC published version 2.0 of its Verification Of Payee matching recommendations. The document addresses character conversion and the handling of spelling differences, initials, phonetic variations and business names. It describes how providers can distinguish a match, close match and no match, while leaving responding providers responsible for their matching outcomes. These are matching recommendations, rather than a universal scoring algorithm.

Editorial interpretation: a useful training exercise should include legitimate names that look different. Ask learners to separate identity uncertainty from formatting differences, then explain what a warning communicates. Treat the returned match category as evidence with limitations, not a complete fraud verdict.

A question for your next team meeting

What would we need to verify before this changes our workflow?