← BACK
Case Study · Fintech · AI Underwriting

I had four weeks to design an AI mortgage tool from the ground up.

Autowrite helps mortgage brokers process applications faster using AI. When I joined, there was no design at all. My job was to figure out what it should look like and how it should work.

Role
Sole product designer
Timeline
0 to MVP in 4 weeks
Domain
Mortgage underwriting
Stack
Figma · React (collab)
Sole designerRegulated domainAI product
app.autowrite.ai/pipeline
Pipeline
6 active deals
Filter
+ New deal
Lead2
Priya Mehta
$640,000
87%2d ago
Tom & Sarah Willis
$1,100,000
95%1d ago
In Review1
David Chen
$895,000
44%5d ago
Submitted2
M. Okonkwo
$510,000
93%8d ago
J. & R. Patel
$780,000
71%6d ago
Approved1
Lisa Fontaine
$425,000
99%14d ago
4 weeks
ZERO TO LIVE
The Problem

Three separate apps, no connection between them, and hours of copying the same thing by hand.

A mortgage broker's job is to help clients get the best loan. But a huge chunk of their day was just moving data between software tools that didn't talk to each other. By the time they'd filled everything in everywhere, they'd already spent hours on admin work before making a single real decision.

The Broker
Three apps, none talking to each other
Brokers used Filogix to submit, Velocity to check lender rules, and Outlook to chase documents. Same client data, typed three times. Every single application.
The AI
The AI was right 90% of the time
Autowrite could read uploaded documents and pull out financial numbers automatically. The problem was brokers had no way of knowing which numbers to trust. There was no signal for uncertainty, so they had to double-check everything anyway.
Compliance
Compliance problems only showed up at the end
Regulatory checks happened after hours of work were already done. If something failed, the broker had to start over. Nobody wanted to flag issues early because it felt like creating more work for themselves.
The old stack
A broker's morning toolkit
Filogix Expert
Application portal
Velocity
Lender submission
Outlook
Client email trail
⌘C
Copy-paste hell
Same data, typed 3× across platforms
?
No single source of truth
Which version is the real one?

Reconstructed from broker interviews. Some were doing this on every single application.

Design Decision 01

The AI could read documents and pull out numbers. But brokers couldn't tell which numbers to trust.

When a broker uploaded a client's income slip or appraisal, the AI would scan it and fill in the numbers. Most of the time it was right. But sometimes it wasn't, and there was no way to tell the difference.

So I added a confidence score to every field. A small, color-coded signal right next to the value. Green means the AI is confident. Amber means take a look. Red means you need to fill this in yourself.

The broker stays in control. The AI earns trust by being honest about what it doesn't know.

Confidence scoring panel
AI Extraction Review
5 fields · 2 need review
APPLICANT NAME · VOI Doc
David Chen
98%
ANNUAL INCOME · T4 Slip
$142,000
91%
EMPLOYMENT TYPE · NOA 2023
Self-employed
73%
PROPERTY VALUE · Appraisal
$895,000
44%
DEBT OBLIGATIONS · Credit Report
$2,340 / mo
88%
Accept all high-confidence
Review 2 flagged
app.autowrite.ai/compliance
Autowrite compliance view
Compliance as a first-class tab, not an afterthought.
Design Decision 02

Compliance checks used to happen at the very end. By then, it was expensive to fix anything.

In mortgage lending, there are rules about what you can and can't submit to a lender. Before Autowrite, brokers only found out they'd broken one of those rules after all the work was done. Then they had to start the whole application over.

I made compliance its own tab, always visible while the broker was working. Problems showed up early, when they were still small and easy to fix.

Design Decision 03

Brokers were tracking their deals in spreadsheets. We built a better home screen.

The pipeline view became the first thing brokers saw when they logged in. Every active deal in one place, with its current stage, outstanding flags, and last activity. Scannable in seconds.

The goal was to replace the spreadsheet brokers were maintaining on the side, not by asking them to change behaviour, but by making the app more useful than the spreadsheet.

12
Active deals visible at once
3
Clicks to submit a deal
app.autowrite.ai/pipeline
Autowrite pipeline view
Design Decision 04

The original form asked for everything upfront. Most brokers gave up halfway through.

The intake form had every single field on one screen. You couldn't see any AI output until the whole thing was done. It was a lot to take in, and brokers regularly dropped off before finishing.

I split it into three stages: who the borrower is, what they earn, and what property they're buying. Complete stage one, the AI starts working. You don't have to finish everything before you see any value.

Staged intake · interactive
Full Name
David Chen
Date of Birth
Mar 14, 1985
SIN (last 4)
●●●● 7823

Identity locked in. Next: income.

app.autowrite.ai/deals
Autowrite deals list
The Result

When brokers stopped using their spreadsheet, we knew it was working.

The deals list shows every client in one place: where their application is, what still needs doing, and any flags the AI raised. Each row is readable in a couple of seconds.

A few brokers told us they stopped maintaining the spreadsheet they used to keep on the side. That was the real sign it had clicked.

Looking back

The hardest part of this project wasn't the UI. It was figuring out how much a broker should have to do manually, and how much it was safe to hand off to the AI, without them feeling like they'd lost control.

Four weeks isn't a lot of time to figure that out in a regulated industry neither of us had worked in before. But that constraint also forced good decisions. Every design choice had to be justifiable in one sentence.

Want to hear the
real story?

Four weeks, a lot of fast decisions, and a domain I had never worked in before. I'd rather walk you through it properly.

Get in touch →
NEXTOntario Water →