97958 Debt team - connect digital disupte endpoint to model

[digitaldrk]

Summary

• *This work is behind a feature toggle (flipper): YES/NO": NO
• (Summarize the changes that have been made to the platform): This connects the DigitalDispute model to the Digital Dispute controller. This feature is not accessible to the user currently, we are waiting on our partner DMC to provide an endpoint for our submissions.
• (If bug, how to reproduce): N/A
• (What is the solution, why is this the solution?): We are working on getting small timely PR's in in preparation for feature launch. We may end up changing some of this as frontend code settles in.
• (Which team do you work for, does your team own the maintenance of this component?): Debt Resolution. You can find me on Octo Slack at #debt-resolution
• (If introducing a flipper, what is the success criteria being targeted?): N/A

Related issue(s)

• Link to ticket created in va.gov-team repo OR screenshot of Jira ticket if your team uses Jira: ticket link
• Link to previous change of the code/bug (if applicable)
• Link to epic if not included in ticket

Testing done

• New code is covered by unit tests
• Describe what the old behavior was prior to the change: This is new code/functionality, there is no old behavior
• Describe the steps required to verify your changes are working as expected. Exclusively stating 'Specs run' is NOT acceptable as appropriate testing: I only have specs at my disposal currently
• If this work is behind a flipper:: N/A
  • Tests need to be written for both the flipper on and flipper off scenarios. Docs.
  • What is the testing plan for rolling out the feature?

Screenshots

Note: Optional

What areas of the site does it impact?

(Describe what parts of the site are impacted andifcode touched other areas)

Acceptance criteria

• I fixed|updated|added unit tests and integration tests for each feature (if applicable).
• No error nor warning in the console.
• Events are being sent to the appropriate logging solution
• Documentation has been updated (link to documentation)
• No sensitive information (i.e. PII/credentials/internal URLs/etc.) is captured in logging, hardcoded, or specs
• Feature/bug has a monitor built into Datadog (if applicable)
• If app impacted requires authentication, did you login to a local build and verify all authenticated routes work as expected
• I added a screenshot of the developed feature

Requested Feedback

(OPTIONAL)What should the reviewers know in addition to the above. Is there anything specific you wish the reviewer to assist with. Do you have any concerns with this PR, why?

[OptionSelect]

LGTM! 🚀

[github-actions]

Backend-review-group approval confirmed.