Payments integration and reconciliation
Payment providers, schemes and ledgers connected, reconciled and monitored — because a payment integration that does not reconcile is a support queue waiting to happen.
What payments work actually involves
Provider integration
Card, transfer, direct debit and invoice payment, with retries, mandates and failure behaviour defined per method rather than as one generic flow.
Reconciliation
Scheduled comparison between the platform, the provider and the ledger, with differences raised as exceptions rather than found at the close.
Settlement handling
Settlement files, fees and timing differences modelled, so the money that arrives can always be matched to the transactions behind it.
Exception queues
Unmatched payments, partial settlements and small differences routed to defined rules, with a queue for the ones needing a person.
Re-creating existing flows
Taking over, improving and migrating payment solutions already in place, without a gap in service.
Monitoring
Alerting on failure rates, latency and divergence, because payment problems are found by customers if they are not found by monitoring.
Don’t see your challenge here? Talk to us about your project
The integration and the reconciliation are the same job
It is tempting to treat connecting a provider as the integration and matching the money as a finance task. In practice the matching rules determine what the integration has to carry — references, identifiers, settlement batches — so designing them separately guarantees rework.
We design the reconciliation first and let it dictate what the integration transports. It is a slower start and a considerably shorter month-end.
- Reconciliation-first
- Matching rules decide what the integration carries.
- Per-method behaviour
- Retries and failures defined per payment type.
- Settlement modelled
- Fees and timing differences accounted for.
- Exceptions surfaced
- Unmatched items queued, not buffered silently.
- Migratable
- Existing flows taken over without a service gap.
- Monitored
- Failure rates and divergence alerted on.
Integrating, re-creating and improving existing payment solutions
Much of our payments work is not greenfield: taking over a flow that already exists, understanding what it actually does, and improving it without a gap in service. The reconciliation design is usually where the real problem turns out to be.
Common questions
Which providers do you work with?
The ones your markets use. We have integrated European gateways, bank direct debit schemes and invoice payment flows, and we build to your commercial choice rather than steering you to a particular provider.
Can you migrate us off an existing provider?
Yes, and usually in parallel — running both until the new flow reconciles cleanly, then cutting over. A hard switch on a payment path is rarely worth the risk.
How much reconciliation can be automated?
Most of it. The realistic target is that routine matching runs itself and exceptions arrive in a queue with enough context to resolve quickly, not that nobody ever looks at it.
Let's talk about your financial platform
Tell us what you are running today, what it has to integrate with and which part of it you cannot currently prove. We will come back with an honest read on the architecture, the regulatory constraints and what a realistic first phase looks like.
