Data Flows
- Solid = evidenced
- Dashed = not evidenced
- Unknown Amber = unknown retention or vendor training
- Globe = leaves the UK
Payroll anomaly detection
Tax-code review suggestions· Vendor B (United Kingdom)
Onboarding document extraction· LLM Provider A (United States)
Steps (13 of 13)
| ID | Step | From | To | Data | Location | Retention | Vendor training | Evidence | Basis | Gap | Requests | Findings |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Customer payroll team | PendlePay platform | Pay-run data: salary; deductions; payment history | PendlePay hosting – to confirm | General payroll records – outside AI scope | Not applicable – in-house | Evidence-supported | Hosting location (RQ-09) | None | |||
| 2 | PendlePay platform | Anomaly model (in-house) | Pay-run data | Inside PendlePay – does not leave | Not separately documented | Not applicable – in-house | Evidence-supported | — | None | None | ||
| 3 | Anomaly model | Review list → payroll user | Flags | Inside PendlePay | Not documented | Not applicable | Evidence-supported | — | None | None | ||
| 4 | Payroll user | Activity record | Dismissal decision with user and time | Inside PendlePay | Not documented | Not applicable | Client-reported | Proof of dismissal records (RQ-07) | None | |||
| 1 | PendlePay platform | Vendor B | Employee tax codes and pay-period data (exact fields to confirm) | United Kingdom | Deleted within 30 days | No | Mixed | Exact fields sent (RQ-08) | None | |||
| 2 | Vendor B | PendlePay platform → payroll user | Tax-code review suggestions | United Kingdom → PendlePay | Not documented | No | Evidence-supported | — | None | |||
| 3 | Payroll user | Payroll record | Accepted tax-code change (only on user action) | Inside PendlePay | General payroll records – outside AI scope | Not applicable | Evidence-supported | — | None | |||
| 1 | Customer HR user (standard; bulk; API routes) | PendlePay platform | Onboarding documents | PendlePay hosting – to confirm | Uploaded files: per retention policy | Not applicable | Evidence-supported | Hosting location (RQ-09) | None | |||
| 2 | PendlePay platform | LLM Provider A | Document content sent in prompt (name; address; start date; bank details) | United States | Unknown | Unknown – website claim only | Client-reported | Signed terms; DPA; transfer safeguard (RQ-01); account settings (RQ-02); vendor retention (RQ-04) | ||||
| 3 | LLM Provider A | PendlePay platform | Extracted fields (output) | United States → PendlePay | Unknown at vendor | Unknown | Client-reported | Vendor retention of outputs (RQ-04) | ||||
| 4 | PendlePay platform | Debug logs | Request content may be logged | Unknown | Unknown – 'kept for a while' | Not applicable | Not evidenced | Log retention and location (RQ-04; RQ-09) | ||||
| 5 | Extracted fields | Review screen → HR user → payroll record | Approved or edited fields | Inside PendlePay | General payroll records – outside AI scope | Not applicable | Mixed | Approval on bulk and API routes (RQ-03) | ||||
| 6 | Buyer's German HR team (pilot) | PendlePay platform → LLM Provider A | German employees' onboarding documents | Germany → PendlePay → United States | Unknown | Unknown | Not evidenced | Updated privacy assessment (RQ-06); German specialist input |