A decision you cannot defend is a decision you cannot use. Somebody has to be able to say what it was based on, who owned it, and why it went that way. We build for banking, payments and financial services, on an engine we built ourselves, so the same inputs reach the same answer every time and the working is there to be read.
Twenty years across banks, financial services, government and international advisory.
Traceable by design
Every decision keeps its working: what went in, how it was reached, and who owned it.
Human oversight
Somebody is named on every workflow, with a review step and a route to escalate it.
Audit-ready evidence
Run it again on the same inputs and you get the same answer, with the evidence to show it.
Live Assessment
AI & Automation Defensibility
Decision rationale
Documented and mapped to obligation
Human oversight
Owner named — escalation path defined
Model & data drift
Gap flagged — monitoring incomplete
Every workflow is scored the same way — a documented chain from input to decision to accountable owner, reproducible on demand.
Proof · the hardest version, already built
All four domains
Rule-writing depth across APP scams, AML transaction monitoring, card fraud, and application/mule fraud — the full financial-crime surface.
Built inside banks
Detection rules written and tuned at scale in live UK banking and payment environments, under regulatory scrutiny, in production.
Mapped to UK obligations
Every rule tied to what it implements — PSR APP reimbursement, the MLRs, FCA SYSC financial-crime, and Consumer Duty.
Reproducible by design
The same inputs produce the same documented, traceable verdict — evidence a regulator, the Financial Ombudsman, or a court will accept.
What we build · legal · health · financial
We build AI, agents, and automation for the sectors where a wrong decision is expensive — banking, payments and financial services — to a standard that holds up under scrutiny. Every build runs on an engine we made ourselves for traceable, reproducible, defensible decisions. The proof it works: a court-defensible fraud and AML engine, already built for FCA-regulated firms. Compliant by design across the UK — clients come from anywhere, the standard doesn’t move.
AI & Automation · Flagship
LiveTraceable, human-defensible AI, agent, and automation workflows for regulated and compliance-critical businesses — banking, payments and financial services — with clear ownership, review, escalation, and audit-ready evidence, built to the UK regime: FCA and PRA expectations, UK GDPR, and the record an auditor or a court will accept.
Financial Crime · Proven flagship
LiveThe proof of the standard: a court-defensible fraud and AML rule engine, built for FCA-regulated firms. Design, tune, and assure detection rules — documented, tested, monitored, owned, and mapped to the regulation each implements, across APP scams, transaction monitoring, card, and application/mule fraud.
Models & Controls
LiveTwo kinds of work, and they are not the same. A model produces an estimate that did not exist — a score, a forecast, a probability — and is judged on how it was fitted. A control decides or checks something and is judged on whether it is documented, owned, tested and traceable to its obligation. Most control estates need far fewer models than they are sold. For UK banking and financial services firms, handed over with the record a supervisor or an internal auditor can read cold.
Regulatory Reporting
LiveIFRS 9 expected credit loss, the annual financial crime return, the APP scams performance data the PSR publishes and ranks, and the periodic returns that go out whether or not anything happened. Built as controls rather than spreadsheets: reconciled to source, reproducible months later, and keeping “not recorded” distinguishable from “recorded as none”.
Governance & Compliance
LiveOwn every AI and automated decision: clear accountability, active oversight, and a reproducible record — for when a regulator, board, or customer asks who owned a decision and how it was made. The same defensibility standard, applied to the governance layer.
Security & Resilience
LiveEvidence-forward, repeatable assurance for the controls that move money and protect customers — the same defensibility approach, applied to cyber and operational-resilience controls: documented, owned, tested, and mapped to the regulation each implements.
Three points where fraud rules are tested
Each now carries a direct financial cost — and each turns on whether the rule was documented, tested, and defensible.
Moment 01
Since mandatory APP-fraud reimbursement, a weak or undocumented detection rule is no longer only a control gap. It is a cost, carried on every claim.
We diagnose the fraud and AML rules against a defensibility scorecard and surface coverage gaps across recognised UK fraud typologies, before they are tested.
Pre-review exposure
Moment 02
The FCA, the Financial Ombudsman, or a court can demand proof that a fraud rule was adequate, tested, owned, and mapped to the regulation it implements.
We establish whether each rule has documented rationale, monitoring and change control, and where the evidence is missing.
Evidence chain
System decision log
Available
Override record
Incomplete
Expert witness analysis
Not commissioned
Moment 03
Defensibility only holds if the rationale is documented, the rule is owned, and the output is reproducible: same inputs, identical traceable result.
We make that structure visible and challenge-ready, with every assessment documented and repeatable, and hand over a regulator-ready pack.
Accountability trace
Business owner
Decision recorded
Governance owner
Review documented
Decision owner
Sign-off traceable
Business output
Defensible?
What we do
Ingress
Lineage
Model
Decision
Review
Data stream
Source integrity and lineage confirmed
Control lane
Exception rules and overrides inspected
Evidence lane
Decision record prepared for challenge
Decision Gate
Review finding
The flow only clears when lineage, control evidence, and accountable release conditions align.
The illustration reads as a resolution sequence: signals enter, controls are tested, evidence accumulates, and the decision gate clears only when the chain is defensible.
Governance
Customers, regulators, and the Financial Ombudsman can demand an explanation for any decision a fraud or AML rule made. Good governance means each question has a clear answer before it is asked.
Named owners
Every decision point has a documented, accountable person.
Traceable decisions
The path from data input to business outcome is reviewable.
Evidence-ready
Records exist in a form regulators and auditors can use.
Decision challenged
Credit decision #REF-4471 — Declined
Referred by compliance team · Tracing accountability chain
Accountable owner
Approval pathway
Data source
Decision rationale
Override record
Tracing 0 of 5 governance controls…
How it works
Three steps. Each replaces uncertainty with a clear view of where the exposure lies and what to do about it.
We identify the system, the decision path, the accountable audience, and the timing pressure.
Scope map
Evidence, system behaviour, governance controls, and decision logic are reviewed without ownership conflict.
Signal isolation
Findings are presented in plain language, with enough technical depth to satisfy regulators, legal advisers, or auditors.
Decision brief
Selected cases
A detection rule is only as strong as the evidence behind it. Whether it runs in a vendor engine or in-house logic, the same question applies — could it be shown adequate, owned, and defensible?
How well would today’s fraud rules hold up?
Run the free defensibility check →What we see in practice
Get in touch
Start with the free defensibility check — an estate scorecard and a single-rule mini-check, no data required. Or book a confidential briefing.