Could you please assist me in editing this short message? Approach it with a business writer's flair, offering engaging content in simple English. Your goal is to review the text provided below, ensuring clarity, correct spelling, punctuation, and grammar. Your revised copy should flow smoothly, be well-structured, and maintain the original message's meaning and intent. Thank you!
Hi Brice,
I hope you had a good day. Today was first working day as yesterday was a bank holiday. I dreaded today but it went ok in terms of having gone through most of the planned task. I’m providing below the main highlights hoping you would get the picture but if you need any clarifications, I am happy to provide them.
I started off with a bit of struggled to get in the network which took me up to half an hour to even get connected. Teams was down even as I write this my status still shows as ‘offline’ even though I have been able to eventually use it throughout the day. Even connecting to AWS wasn’t easy but in the end I got there. What a way to start your first day back!
GR led the meeting on default review. He provided a comprehensive overview of the process. He said although the review is currently done at portfolio level there are still processes, we could learn from. The reviewed came about because of the discrepancies they observed between the MDL and MDS. As part the process, they identify what doesn’t look right according to their known logic and send those of SME (FLOD & SLOD) for them to assess and review separately. Where there is agreement, the correction is adopted at the modelling level, but the data team is notified to make the changes. When there is no agreement, SME are brought together and at the end of that discussion a decision is made and again the changes are adopted.  There are essentially 4 type defaults – unconfirmed, technical, external, and orphan. Unconfirmed are those that have been checked and to identify them there is a column in the MDS. Technical ones triggered some rules but from economic sense they aren’t considered as such. External are recognised outside but if they valid some internal triggers their status is changed; this needs to be revisited as that’s how it was done historically. Orphan should be linked to parent so in case orphan alone is defaulted, parent need to be checked. For each portfolio this will depend on the cascade rule. Although the data team is responsible for making updates in the process, no rule or logic is especially issued. There is no special documentation except the tracker for FLOD & SLOD responses. Maybe in our case we could get a document then get the MUG to approve it. GR will share some details via email although I am not sure what is in those documents.
In the stand up today, it was good to have PA back although you could tell from his voice, he’s still convalescent.  It was suggested by ZR to add a deadline against ICL in the plan. She also insisted for consistency, default procedure should follow the same process as LC; this would include the same definition of defaults and everything else. It was discussed the idea at looking at GR document or code and get an idea of how many defaults and at what level they were identified for LCPD. I said I would go back with more questions after we’ve received the document if necessary. It would be a god idea to give the MUG some head up that something similar was done previously when reaching out to FLOD & SLOD, noting that previously FLOD was not involved. This time as well, we need to make sure everything is properly documented for traceability and compliance. GA volunteer to help with the default review and it was agreed she would speak with SD after the meeting to organise how that would work. I also updated the team about the issue with the data which is now sorted in that we can confirmed access to it. 
I saw an email which was sent on Sunday by ZR. It is about UAT, but I am not sure how related it’s to the re-weighting email I got from her a week or so ago. I need to figure if they are related and what actions are expected. I know I’ve dragged this for a bit, so I need to look sooner than later especially if it’s urgent which I don’t know, to be honest. 

The replanning meeting went reasonably well although we couldn’t cover it in its entirety. I’ll need to revise and include some more columns to improve clarity for example stating and completion dates for tasks and shifting some dates as discussed. However, PA will first have a go for the tasks we didn’t get the time to review. We’ll pick that up again tomorrow in a meeting with the data team.

On the RDS acceptance, I had an impromptu call with LR & BA to discuss the various groupings we’ve put together. I made additional suggestions, and we’ll have to do some ‘proper’ checks soon. LR was tasked with coming up with actual checks we’ll be doing, and BA confirm the number of variables are as expected. Although we don’t currently have the data dictionary, there are some checks we need to prepare to carry out. For instance RMAT/RMP but do we have access to those in AWS?

That’s all for tonight.

Speak tomorrow.

Decker