MHR| Require QS to re-sign service agreement following critical account changes

### Problem Statement
Qualified Supplier agreement data cannot be viewed or managed after approval. Changes to agreement‑driven data are not detected or enforced by the system. No system control exists to trigger review or re‑acceptance of service agreements when critical data changes occur.
### Current State
Once a Qualified Supplier application is approved, the agreement is no longer accessible to suppliers or staff, and only a status indicator remains visible on the account. Agreement data such as QS name and address is reused downstream to populate registrations and transactions. Updates made on the account page are not propagated to the Assets UI. Changes to agreement‑linked data are handled manually through IT OPS tickets. As a result, multiple transactions are completed using outdated agreement data before issues are identified.
### Potential Risks

- Outdated agreement data continues to drive registrations and subsequent records.
- Incorrect information is recorded across multiple transactions before correction.
- Suppliers are unaware of discrepancies between account profile data and agreement data.
- Operational effort increases due to reliance on manual IT OPS intervention.
- Compliance risk arises when agreement terms are changed without explicit re acceptance.
- Error correction requires retroactive investigation and remediation.

### Desired Outcomes

- Clear Alignment Between Account Updates and Agreement Data, agreement information should be updated when the QS update their account profile.
- Controlled Ability to Update Critical Information: staff expressed a preference for a controlled mechanism to manage changes such as address updates, but such changes should not require repeated IT OPS tickets as the default process.
- Prevention of Outdated Data Being Used: The system should prevent or clearly flag transactions when agreement information is no longer accurate. emphasis is on early detection rather than retroactive correction.
- Re Acceptance or Acknowledgement When Data Changes: changes should trigger re acknowledgement. QS should explicitly confirm or re accept when core agreement data is updated.
- Reduced Operational Burden on Staff: managing agreement changes currently falls too heavily on staff.

### BA Notes:

- When Qualified Supplier information changes (on their account page),

updates are not applied automatically on the Assets UI. An IT OPS ticket is required for manual updates, this usually occurs after errors are reported. During this delay, multiple registrations can be completed using outdated data. Registrations are issued with incorrect details, and corrections require additional tickets and retroactive fixes. Suppliers often believe updates were completed successfully, though agreement data remains unchanged.
- A potential approach discussed was introducing a flag requiring re-acceptance of the service agreement when critical data changes occur.