Frequently asked questions.

Yes. Yarqat LTD is a company registered in London, United Kingdom, with a named founder and a real registered office. You can email or call the company directly, and everything on our About page is checkable.

Yarqat was founded by Shah Fahad, a self-taught engineer who spent years building software for other businesses and ran his own hosting company before starting Yarqat. You can read the full story on our founder page.

Yarqat launched on 7 February 2024. It was built on years of prior engineering and operations experience rather than starting from nothing, which is why the delivery is senior from day one.

Yarqat is registered in London, United Kingdom, and delivers to clients worldwide. Because we are a distributed team, we arrange our working hours to overlap your working day wherever you are, so you get real daily overlap rather than a few hours at the edges.

Yarqat is an engineer-led software and AI consultancy. We architect, build and operate the systems we ship. We are not a staffing agency reselling hours, and we are not a large firm that wins logos and delivers with juniors.

We are a senior team and we deliberately do not publish a headcount or claim a number of experts, because an inflated figure is the fastest way to lose the trust of a buyer who checks. What matters is that the people who win your work are the people who do it.

Because you can verify what we claim: a registered legal entity, a named founder with a public track record, transparent process and standards, and code that lives in your own repositories from the first commit. Trust here is earned by checkable facts, not by age.

Start with the contact page. You will get a technical conversation with the engineers who would do the work, usually with a reply within one business day, not a sales call.

We cover custom software engineering, AI and automation, cloud and DevOps, data and analytics, web and mobile, and dedicated engineering teams. You can browse the full catalogue on the services page.

Yes. We can own the whole path: discovery and architecture, build, launch, and then operation once it is live. Because one senior team carries all of it, nothing falls into the gap between vendors.

Both. A large part of our work is inheriting systems that already exist: stabilising them, paying down risk, and extending them safely. We start by learning the system as it actually is, including the parts nobody documented.

Yes, this is common work. We begin with an honest assessment of what is there, what is salvageable and what is not, and we tell you plainly rather than selling a full rewrite you may not need.

Yes. We stay on the pager after launch with monitoring, incident response and iteration. A team that owns the incident designs differently from one that hands over and leaves.

Yes. A focused technical review, with a written assessment of risks, priorities and options, is a valid engagement on its own. Sometimes the most useful thing we deliver is a clear-eyed opinion.

We are a software and AI engineering consultancy, so we do not do brand design, paid media or generic IT support. If something is outside what we do well, we will say so rather than stretch to win the work.

Yes. We build call centre systems including VICIdial engineering, AI voice agents and Twilio development. These map to real services and technologies in our catalogue.

Software built specifically for your business rather than bought off the shelf: internal platforms, customer-facing products, workflow systems, integrations and automations. We build it when an off-the-shelf tool cannot fit how you actually work.

Often you should buy. We will tell you when an existing product is the sensible answer instead of quoting a build. Custom is worth it when the software is a genuine differentiator or when no product fits your process without expensive compromises.

Yes. Integration is core work: connecting your systems, ERPs, payment providers and third-party APIs so data flows correctly and reliably, with the error handling and audit trail that real integrations need.

We work in short cycles against working software, so change is expected rather than feared. The architecture decisions made early are designed to keep the expensive things stable while the details evolve.

We architect for the load you realistically expect, not for imaginary hyperscale, and we make the scaling path explicit so it is there when you need it. Over-engineering for scale you will never see is its own kind of waste.

Yes. For an early-stage product we focus on the shortest honest path to something real users can use, while keeping the foundation clean enough that the next stage does not require a rewrite.

You do, completely, from the first commit. Code lives in your repositories and infrastructure lives in your accounts. There is no proprietary layer you must keep paying us to operate.

We build LLM applications, agentic workflows, model pipelines and AI enablement. We treat AI as real architecture with retrieval, evaluation and guardrails, not a prompt dropped into a text box.

Sometimes it genuinely pays for itself and sometimes it does not, and we will tell you which. A useful part of our AI work is identifying where AI does not earn its place in your operation so you do not spend on it.

Yes. We build agentic workflows that take actions against real infrastructure, with the audit trail, permissions and rollback path that implies. Actions without accountability are a liability, so we design for both.

With evaluation and guardrails treated as first-class parts of the system: grounding answers in your data through retrieval, testing against real cases, and constraining what the model is allowed to do. We measure quality rather than assume it.

Yes. We can integrate AI capabilities into a system you already run, scoped to a specific job that has a measurable outcome, rather than bolting on a feature because it is fashionable.

Yes. AI voice agents are part of our call centre work, alongside VICIdial and Twilio engineering, so the automation fits into a real telephony operation rather than a demo.

You control your data and the deployment. We design AI systems so that data handling, model choice and hosting are explicit decisions you own, not a black box you cannot inspect.

We choose models per problem, including the latest capable commercial and open models, and we design the system so a model can be swapped as the field moves. The architecture matters more than any single model.

We work across the major clouds and choose per requirement rather than by default. Infrastructure is declared as code, so nothing important is configured by hand in a console where it cannot be reviewed or reproduced.

Yes. Automated build, test and deployment pipelines are standard in how we work. Tests gate every merge, with no exceptions made for deadlines, because that is exactly when mistakes ship.

Yes. We can review where spend actually goes and address the real drivers, which are usually a few architectural choices rather than a long list of small tweaks. We tell you which changes move the bill.

Yes, as a rule. Infrastructure is declared as code so it is reviewable, reproducible and recoverable. Hand-configured infrastructure is a system nobody can rebuild after an incident.

Yes. We plan migrations around the risk to the running business, moving in stages with a tested rollback path rather than a single high-stakes cutover.

Observability ships with the feature, not after it: structured logs, traces and alerts so problems are visible before your users report them. We instrument as we build.

Yes. Operating what we build is part of the model. We can carry ongoing reliability, monitoring and incident response so the system stays healthy after launch.

We build the pipelines and warehousing that move your data from where it is created to where it can be trusted and used, with the quality checks that make the numbers dependable.

Yes, on top of a data foundation that is actually correct. A dashboard is only as trustworthy as the pipeline behind it, so we get the data right first.

We build validation and monitoring into the pipeline so bad data is caught early rather than surfacing as a wrong figure in a board report. Data quality is engineered, not hoped for.

Yes. Clean, well-structured data is the precondition for useful AI, and preparing it properly is often the larger part of the work. We handle that groundwork as seriously as the model.

Yes, when the use case genuinely needs it. We are also honest when a simpler batch approach would serve you better at a fraction of the cost and complexity.

Yes. Bringing scattered data from different tools into one reliable place, so it can be queried and reported on consistently, is core data work for us.

Yes. We build web applications from customer-facing products to internal platforms, engineered for performance, accessibility and maintainability rather than just a demo that looks right.

Yes. We build mobile applications and can advise on native versus cross-platform based on your users and roadmap, rather than defaulting to whatever is trendy.

Yes. Performance and search visibility are engineering concerns we take seriously, from server-rendered content to fast load times, because a beautiful site nobody can find does not help the business.

We are engineers first. We deliver clean, considered interfaces and can work to a design system, but if your project needs deep brand and product design we will be honest about where a specialist adds more.

Yes. We can diagnose why a site or app is slow, which is usually a handful of real bottlenecks, and fix the ones that actually move the experience for users.

Yes. Accessibility is built in rather than retrofitted, so the product works for more people and meets the standards buyers increasingly require.

Yes. We build commerce systems and the integrations they depend on, such as payments, inventory and fulfilment, engineered to handle real transaction volume reliably.

We work across a broad range of languages, frameworks, cloud platforms, and AI and data tooling. You can browse the full list on the technologies page. We choose per problem, not per fashion.

By the problem in front of us: the requirements, your existing systems, your team, and what will still be maintainable in three years. We would rather use a proven, boring option than a fashionable, risky one.

No. We build on standard, widely-supported technology so your own team, or any other competent team, can maintain the result. Lock-in that only benefits the vendor is exactly what we avoid.

Yes. If your team already runs a particular stack, working within it is usually the right call so you can maintain what we build. We adapt to your context rather than imposing ours.

Yes, but we adopt deliberately. New technology has to earn its place by solving a real problem better than the proven option, not just by being new. We track the field and choose carefully.

Yes. We modernise legacy systems in stages that keep the business running, rather than betting everything on a single rewrite. The safe path is usually incremental.

Yes, as a standard. Automated test suites gate every merge, so the software stays correct as it changes and the next engineer can move without fear of breaking things silently.

We bring domain knowledge to a range of sectors and list them on the industries page. Understanding your industry before the first meeting means the conversation starts with your constraints, not with us learning them on your budget.

Both. We work with early-stage founders who need a strong foundation and with established businesses modernising or extending critical systems. What matters is that getting the software right actually matters to you.

Yes. We take on systems where getting it wrong is expensive and treat that responsibility as the job, with the architecture rigour, testing and documentation that regulated work demands.

We know several sectors well and are honest when a domain is new to us. When it is, we invest properly in learning it during discovery rather than pretending an expertise we do not yet have.

We can. Public sector work has particular requirements around procurement, documentation and accountability, all of which fit how we already operate as a UK-registered company.

Yes. We are used to enterprise procurement and security review, and our practices, from IP ownership to documentation, are designed to pass that scrutiny rather than to scrape through it.

Yes. We architect for realistic load and make the scaling path explicit, so a product that succeeds does not fall over at the moment it matters most.

With a technical conversation rather than a sales pitch, usually followed by a paid discovery phase before the large decisions are made. That way the estimate is grounded in your real system, not a guess.

Four stages carried by one team: discover, architect, build, operate. We decide the hard things early and in writing, then build in short cycles against working software, then stay on to run it.

Because most of what goes wrong in software is decided in the first two weeks, in architecture nobody wrote down. Paid discovery buys a grounded plan and an honest estimate instead of a number invented to win the deal.

In working software, not a status deck. Short delivery cycles mean you see the product move regularly, so progress is something you can use rather than something you are told about.

Directly with the engineers doing the work, on a real daily overlap with your timezone. There is no account manager relaying messages to a team you never meet.

Architecture decisions are recorded as we go, so the reasoning is inherited by the next engineer rather than lost. Documentation and runbooks are part of the deliverable, not an upsell afterwards.

We explain our reasoning and we listen to yours. Our job is to give you the best judgement we have, clearly enough that you can decide. The decision is yours, and we record why it was made.

It depends on the real scope, which is what discovery establishes. We give you a range with named cost and time drivers, and we tell you which decisions move it, rather than a single confident number that is really a guess.

Three: a dedicated team that works only on your product, staff augmentation where named senior engineers embed into your team, and outcome-owned software outsourcing. We help you pick the one that fits.

A standing team that works only on your product, in your rituals and your tooling. It suits ongoing product development where the roadmap outlives any single project.

Named senior engineers embedded into your existing team and reporting into your leads. It suits the case where you know what to build and need real capacity, not direction.

Senior engineers, working directly with you. We do not run a pyramid where a principal wins the work and juniors deliver it. The people in your kickoff are the people on your commits.

Yes. You can scale from a single specialist to a full delivery team without a hiring cycle, and adjust as the work changes, because we staff to the work rather than to a fixed contract.

That is the intent. Continuity of the people who understand your system is part of the value, and we manage engagements to protect it rather than rotating faces.

Yes. We are used to working inside an existing team, respecting its standards and tooling, and raising the bar by example rather than by taking over.

It depends on the shape of the work, so we do not quote from a day-rate card. Most engagements begin with paid discovery so the estimate is grounded in your real system, given as a range with named cost drivers.

By the work, not by a fixed rate sheet. We give you a range with the specific things that move it, so you understand the cost drivers and can make decisions that change them.

For well-defined, bounded outcomes we can. For evolving product work, fixed price usually means padding the number or cutting quality when reality shifts, so we are honest about when it does and does not serve you.

We invoice from our UK entity. If your business has specific local tax or procurement requirements, tell us during scoping and we will accommodate them.

No. After discovery, engagements are month-to-month. You are retained by the work being worth continuing, not by a clause that traps you when it is not.

It varies with the work. A focused audit or discovery can be small, while a full build is larger. We would rather scope something that genuinely helps than sell a minimum package that does not.

Yes, and we encourage it. A paid discovery or a contained first piece of work lets both sides see how we operate before committing to more. Fit is proven, not promised.

We flag drift early, with the reason and the options, rather than presenting a surprise at the end. Because we work in the open against working software, overruns are visible while there is still time to decide.

Security is built in, not bolted on: dependency scanning, secret management and least-privilege access as defaults. We treat it as part of engineering rather than a checklist at the end.

You do, completely, from the first commit. Code lives in your repositories, infrastructure in your accounts, and there is no proprietary layer you depend on us to keep running.

Yes. We are happy to sign a non-disclosure agreement before we discuss anything sensitive. Confidentiality is a normal part of how we work.

With least-privilege access, careful secret management and data handling designed into the system. Access to your data and systems is scoped to what the work genuinely requires and no more.

We design systems with data protection obligations in mind and can build to the requirements you are subject to. We are engineers, not your legal advisor, so we implement the controls and you confirm the legal position.

Yes. We can review an existing system for security risks and give you a written, prioritised assessment of what to fix and in what order, based on real exposure rather than a generic checklist.

Only what the work requires, granted on least-privilege terms, and revocable. We would rather ask for narrow access and request more when justified than hold broad access we do not need.

We do not claim certifications we do not hold. What we can show you is how we actually work: the specific practices around access, secrets, dependencies and review that a buyer can verify in a technical conversation.

The engagement continues if you want it to. We stay on with monitoring, incident response and iteration, because the system is alive and it needs people who understand it when something goes wrong.

Yes. We can agree support arrangements and service levels that match how critical the system is, so response is defined rather than best-effort when it matters.

We stay on the pager for the systems we operate. A team that owns the incident builds more carefully in the first place, which is one reason we do not simply hand over and leave.

Yes, after a proper handover and assessment so we genuinely understand it. We will be honest about what we find and what it takes to operate it safely.

You keep a system your own team can run. Documentation, architecture decisions and operational runbooks are part of the deliverable, so there is no cliff edge when we step back.

No, and that is deliberate. We build so your team can take over: standard technology, your repositories and accounts, and the documentation to run it. Being needed forever is a failure, not a business model.

We work with clients worldwide. Because we are a distributed team, we arrange our hours to overlap your working day wherever you are, rather than asking you to bend to a single timezone.

Yes. UK registration gives you an accountable legal entity to contract with, and our distributed delivery means we can align to your working hours in most regions. Where you are does not decide whether we can work together.

We treat overlap as a requirement, not an afterthought. The team is organised so there is a real daily window shared with you for standups, reviews and incident response, wherever in the world you are based.

You get the accountability of a named legal entity registered in the UK together with delivery that aligns to your working hours. For many buyers that combination, verifiable structure plus genuine overlap, is exactly the reassurance they want.

Yes. Modern software teams do their best work with strong remote collaboration and real daily overlap, and that is how we operate. Where an engagement genuinely benefits from time on the ground, we discuss it case by case.

Most collaboration is remote with a strong daily overlap, which is how we keep delivery fast and transparent. Where a specific engagement warrants meeting in person, we arrange it case by case.

We invoice from our UK entity. If your business has specific local tax or procurement requirements, raise them during scoping and we will accommodate them. For the tax position on your side, confirm with your own accountant.

Yes. We build for multiple languages and right-to-left layouts as an engineering requirement, so a localized product works properly rather than looking like an afterthought.

We learn the specifics of your market and operation during discovery rather than assuming a generic one. When a domain or region is new to us, we invest properly in understanding it instead of pretending an expertise we do not yet have.

Open roles, when we have them, are listed on the careers page. We hire deliberately for senior, accountable engineers rather than filling seats.

Senior engineers who can own outcomes: people who architect, build and operate, and who are comfortable talking directly to clients rather than hiding behind a manager.

Our delivery is senior by default because that is what we promise clients. When we do bring on less experienced people, it is on our own account for their growth, never staffed silently against a client budget.

We are a distributed team that works across time zones, so remote work with real overlap is how we operate. What matters is accountability and communication, not a specific location.

Through the careers page, where you can see current openings and submit an application. If there is a fit, you will talk to engineers, not just a recruiter.

Small, senior and accountable. You own real work end to end, you talk to the people you build for, and the standard is that we operate what we ship rather than throwing it over a wall.