9.S1 — Spike: Identify which MHR documents can be validated by Document AI

**Priority (MoSCoW):** Must
**Persona:** Policy Analyst
**Value:** Provide clarity on which supporting documents in MHR transactions are eligible for automated validation, so that the team can safely scope Document AI integration in compliance with legislation.

---

## Spike Description
This is a **research and policy spike**. The goal is to determine which categories of documents uploaded with MHR transactions can be processed by Document AI for authenticity checks. The outcome will define the boundaries for Epic 9 and inform downstream stories.

---

## Research Questions
- Which MHR transaction types include uploaded documents[ (see MHR Requests) ](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ZPxfFchziAGuOUdBUvY2rGR53YlYZGXwoJJCmhhviXU/edit?gid=0#gid=0)
- For each document type (e.g., affidavits, probate grants, wills, bills of sale, tax certificates, CSA labels, etc.):
- Is the document eligible for automated validation under current **Manufactured Home Act / Regulation**?
- Are there any policy restrictions on scanning/analysis (e.g., FOIPPA, court-sealed documents, Vital Statistics)?
- Should all documents in a transaction be validated, or only key documents (e.g., death certificate, proof of ownership)?
- What risks or exemptions exist (e.g., highly sensitive or sealed documents that should not be processed by AI)?
- Which external authorities (LTSA, BC Assessment, Courts, Vital Statistics) govern specific documents, and do they allow digital validation?

---

## Expected Deliverables
- A **table of MHR document types** (by transaction), marked as:
- ✅ “Validate with AI”
- ⚠️ “Review policy first”
- ❌ “Do not validate with AI”
- Policy rationale for each classification (Act/Reg citation if applicable).
- Recommendations for MVP vs. Post-MVP scope.

---

## MVP Boundary
- **In:** Research and recommendations on document eligibility for Document AI validation.
- **Out:** Technical integration, UI design, or implementation.

---

## Acceptance Criteria
- [ ] Table of MHR documents (by transaction type) with eligibility classification.
- [ ] Policy citations or rationale attached to each decision.
- [ ] Risks or open questions clearly documented.
- [ ] Recommendation of which document types to include in MVP.

---

## BA Section (for policy + BA collaboration)
- [ ] Confirm authoritative sources (MHR Act, MHR Reg, FOIPPA).
- [ ] Flag documents that may require Registrar/legal sign-off.
- [ ] Identify if exemptions are needed for court-sealed or Vital Statistics records.
- [ ] Review whether validation scope should include supporting documents only, or also cover forms submitted directly online.

---

### BA — Prompts
- Are there any documents that cannot be **copied, scanned, or altered** by law (e.g., original death certificates)?
- Does the **Registrar’s discretion** (MHA s.8, Reg s.3) allow us to require proof validation through AI?
- Should **non-textual evidence** (photos of CSA labels, handwritten bills of sale) be included in AI validation?
- Which filings would most benefit analysts if documents were pre-validated (e.g., TOD, exemptions, transport permits)?

---

Start by reviewing the linked MHR Requests spreadsheet and the authoritative MHR Act, MHR Regulation, and FOIPPA sources. Check the listed external authorities, including LTSA, BC Assessment, Courts, and Vital Statistics, for restrictions and validation rules. Done means a transaction-by-document table with eligibility classifications, policy citations, risks, open questions, and MVP recommendations.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.