Sign in
Free

Free ISO 20022 postal-address conformity check

FREE rule check on a postal address YOU have already structured, for the November 2026 structured-address deadlines (SPS 2026 in force 14 Nov 2026, last SIC release accepting unstructured addresses 20 Nov 2026, Fedwire production 16 Nov 2026, T2 R2026.NOV). Pure rule evaluation — it reads no database, which is why it is free. Every finding names the document the rule comes from, with its date. Schemes: sps, hvps_plus, fedwire. No 'cbpr+' scheme is offered, on purpose. The CBPR+ usage guideline and the PMPG "November 2026 postal address guidance" are published on swift.com, which was unreachable on 26.08.2026 (iso20022.org likewise; europeanpaymentscouncil.eu returns 403 on its document library). Every rule applied here is quoted from a document that was actually read, and each finding names it. A boolean claiming CBPR+ conformity would be a guess dressed as a verdict. It does NOT parse or normalise a free-text address into a structured one — that needs national postal reference data we do not hold.

post/v1/address/check

Request body

scheme'sps' | 'hvps_plus' | 'fedwire' required

The payment scheme whose rules to apply. 'hvps+' is accepted as a spelling of 'hvps_plus'. 'cbpr+' is refused with an explanation rather than answered with a guess.

Example request

{
  "scheme": "sps",
  "address": {
    "twn_nm": "Zurich",
    "ctry": "CH",
    "pst_cd": "8001",
    "strt_nm": "Bahnhofstrasse",
    "bldg_nb": "45"
  }
}

Response

Conformity verdict. One finding per rule evaluated, passing or failing, so a caller can see what was checked and not only what broke.

scheme'sps' | 'hvps_plus' | 'fedwire' required
conformsboolean required

True when no finding failed. Rules that did not apply do not count against it.

notestring required

Why no cbpr+ scheme is offered. Served on every answer.

Example response

{
  "findings": [
    {
      "rule": "adr_line_no_repeat"
    }
  ]
}

Changes