The documents arrive unsorted, the deed is built by hand

This article describes a use case. We have not delivered an engagement in a notarial office: what follows is what we observe of the profession and its tools, not the account of a deployment.

Three systems, all closed

French notarial practice runs on a small number of approved solutions — iNot, Genapi, Fichorga — which structure the file, carry legal certainty and handle retention. They are good tools for what they do.

They share one characteristic: they are closed. Not through negligence, but because the profession is narrow, regulated, and the vendor that equips it has no interest in a third-party program writing into its software. The consequence is mechanical: everything entering the office has to be carried in by a person.

Unsorted, and what that imposes

Building a deed means reconciling two worlds that do not have the same shape.

On one side, a structured draft with its mandatory particulars and its internal consistencies. On the other, a stream of heterogeneous documents: a scanned land registry extract, civil status sent by email, a statement the client sent from their phone, a document from an authority that came by post.

Reconciling the two is a matter of reading and memory. It does not delegate easily inside the office, because it requires knowing the file. And it does not delegate to the tool, because the tool cannot see the documents until someone has given them to it.

Drafting the deed is not what takes the most time. Knowing, at any given moment, what is missing — that is what does.

What an agent could take on

Three things, none of which touches drafting or authentication.

• Preparing drafts from the documents already received, inside the office’s own tool.
• Flagging inconsistencies between the draft and its source documents — a date that does not match, a description that has changed, a document that has expired.
• Following formalities and chasing what is missing, without anyone having to hold the list in their head.

What those three have in common: they would produce information for a notary or a clerk, they would produce no decision. Signature, authentication and advice stay entirely with the office. That is not a stylistic precaution — it is what makes the subject approachable at all in a profession where the deed engages the notary’s personal liability as a public officer.

Why we put this in the conditional

Because we have delivered nothing to a notarial office, and saying otherwise would be false.

What we know how to do is established elsewhere: working inside closed practice software, on a machine the office controls, without exfiltrating data and without ever crossing the line of professional liability. What that would give in a notarial office remains to be built, and it starts by watching a real day, at a real notary’s desk, before writing a single line.

---

Engagements we have actually delivered are identified as such in our resources — so are use cases, and the distinction is explicit there.