About

A Chiayi-rooted assurance practice for fintech control questions

Bridgepoint Fintech Assurance was formed to give payment institutions, e-money issuers, and digital lenders an independent pair of eyes before supervisors or investors ask hard questions about client money.

Office building facade in soft daylight

Origin

Our founders spent years inside bank examination support and payment-institution compliance desks across Taiwan. They saw too many boards receive glossy readiness decks that collapsed when a sample of reconciliations was pulled. Bridgepoint exists to write findings that cite evidence, name owners, and survive factual accuracy review.

The practice keeps its office at 538 Bradley Path in 嘉義縣 — close enough to travel for Chiayi and southern fieldwork, and a short rail connection for Taipei-based clients who prefer on-site walkthroughs.

How we work

  • One engagement partner remains accountable from scoping to signed memorandum
  • Samples are drawn from real ledgers, not demo environments
  • Draft findings are shared for factual accuracy before final issue
  • We decline work that would create a conflict with a current examination counsel role

People

Engagement leads

Portrait of engagement partner in professional attire

Helena Lin

Engagement Partner

Former payment-institution compliance head; leads regulatory controls audits and board closing workshops.

Portrait of senior auditor

Marcus Yeh

Senior Auditor

Specialises in safeguarding bank letters, suspense ageing, and daily reconciliation testing for e-money issuers.

Portrait of risk advisor

Sora Nakamura

Credit Controls Advisor

Focuses on lender portfolio sampling — underwriting exceptions, collections handoffs, and impairment markers.

Values that show up in the workpapers

Evidence over narrative. If a control cannot be sampled, we say so rather than paraphrase a policy PDF.

Proportionate findings. Timing differences are labelled as timing differences. Structural segregation failures are labelled as such.

Client respect without cosiness. Draft review is for facts, not for softening residual risk ratings the evidence does not support.

Talk with an engagement lead