Fraud moves faster than rules
Every new pattern means a developer writing another rule, and by the time it ships the pattern has moved. Rules engines are always fighting the last attack.
Financial services & fintech
A payments platform that reconciles perfectly for eleven months and is out by four hundred pounds in December has not had a good year. Financial software is not graded on its average behaviour. It is graded on the worst hour it has ever had, by a regulator, in retrospect, with the ledger in front of them.
“Can you catch the fraud without blocking real customers, and prove both to an auditor?”
The pressure
Every new pattern means a developer writing another rule, and by the time it ships the pattern has moved. Rules engines are always fighting the last attack.
Settlement used to be a batch job. Customers now expect the money to move while they are looking at the screen, which removes the window you used to reconcile in.
PCI DSS, KYC, AML, PSD2, SOC 2. Each one is survivable. The cost is carrying all of them at once in a codebase that also has to ship features.
The system of record is often decades old, well understood by three people, and cannot be replaced in one move without betting the business on it.
The work
Four systems, each of which has to be correct on its worst day rather than its average one.
Models that run inline against the live transaction stream, with a review queue ranked by expected loss rather than by arrival time.
Idempotent, reconcilable, and correct under retry. The hard part is never the happy path, it is the duplicate write at 2am.
Reports generated from the ledger rather than assembled by hand in a spreadsheet the week they are due.
Replacing a legacy core in slices, each one covered by tests and reversible, rather than a rewrite with a launch date and no way back.
The reconciliation test
Any payment system works when the network behaves. These are the conditions we introduce on purpose, in a staging environment, because production will introduce them without asking.
A provider retries a callback the system already processed. The correct outcome is one ledger entry and an acknowledged duplicate, not two charges and a support ticket.
The write succeeded, the confirmation never arrived. On recovery the system must be able to determine which, without a human reading logs.
Ordering by wall clock across machines is a bug waiting for a leap second. We test that sequence survives disagreement.
Four hundred of a thousand movements clear. The reconciliation has to identify the six hundred precisely, not report a mismatched total.
Reprocessing a historic day must produce the identical ledger. If it does not, the ledger was never the source of truth.
Non-negotiable
Where AI actually lands
Worth doing
Where we stop
Anything that moves money without a human in the loop, and anything whose decision you cannot reconstruct. Both fail the same test: an auditor asks why, and "the model said so" is not an answer that ends the conversation.
Evidence
A payments start-up losing money to fraud faster than its analysts could review flagged transactions. Inline scoring, a queue ranked by expected loss, and two million dollars a year that stopped leaving.
Read the case study
How we deliver it
Production ML pipelines, retrieval systems, and evaluation harnesses built to survive audit.
Platforms that hold up under real load, real compliance, and real headcount.
Threat modelling, hardening, and the evidence trail an auditor will ask for.
Other sectors we work in
Next step
No discovery call with a salesperson, no deck. A senior engineer reads what you send and replies with a real assessment, including when we think you shouldn’t build it.
Certified, partnered and awarded
1/7
Start a project
A senior engineer reads every one of these, and replies within one business day. Nothing here goes to a sales sequence.
To begin
One click. It decides what we ask next.
The problem
One line is plenty. This is the part an engineer actually reads first.
Today
Pick any that apply.
Timing
A real deadline changes the design. An arbitrary one does not.
Size
A range is fine. It shapes what we propose, not what we charge.
Your side
It changes whether we lead, embed, or advise.
Last one
A senior engineer replies within one business day. No sequence, no newsletter.
How would you rather hear back?
Sent
Here is what you told us, and what happens next.