Property platforms that take the friction out of how people work together.
Property runs on relationships that break down in the gaps, between managers and suppliers, landlords and tenants, listings and bookings. We build the marketplaces, rental platforms, and management systems that close those gaps, with trust, payments, and communication built in, so work gets agreed, done, and paid for without the mess.
The constraint
In property there is always a fourth party who signs nothing. The tenant did not choose the supplier, did not agree the price, in most cases has no account, and is the person whose home a stranger walks into because two other parties agreed something. They are the reason the trust layer exists and they are not a customer of it. A platform that designs only for the parties who pay has designed for everyone except the person carrying the risk, and in housing that person is also the one the law watches most closely.
Two of the property platforms we have built, chosen because each one turned on a different constraint.
Keylr, a property-services marketplace
For one service in one postcode there can be more than a hundred eligible suppliers. Notify all of them and three things happen at once. Suppliers are flooded with work they will mostly lose, which trains them to ignore notifications. A race forms that rewards whoever is holding their phone rather than the best fit. And the property manager is buried in quotes they never asked for.
So the dispatch engine counts quotes returned rather than suppliers notified. It releases in batches and stops when the property manager's target is met. No further supplier is ever told the job existed.
The vetting chain answers the question a general counsel asks in three seconds: is the person who was checked the same person who turns up. Company-level verification plus a delegation model means the default answer is no, so subcontractors are people on the platform with their own checks, and assignment is the gate.
Tolobi, a rental listings platform
The AI does the three things housing law has always watched: who is shown a home, what the advertisement says, and what it costs. Automating a regulated decision does not remove the regulation, it moves who has to answer for it. When a landlord writes the listing, the landlord is responsible for what it says. When the platform generates it, the statement is the platform's.
So recommendation orders an open catalogue rather than gating one. Every listing stays reachable by anyone. And the generator writes about the property and never about the tenant, because a description of an imagined occupant is ordinary rental language and unlawful in an advertisement.
These are two of the property platforms we have worked on. The full set is in our case studies, including work we cannot name.
Guest access, and the physical layer
This is experience our engineers hold rather than an engagement we delivered. Our engineers include people who have built this, some of it while employed elsewhere, which is a real credential and a different kind of claim.
Guest access is the hardest thing software can grant. A door code issued to a guest's phone at check-in, valid for a window, revoked automatically at checkout, across lock brands that each behave differently and are frequently offline. The failure here is not a bad screen. It is somebody standing outside a house at midnight, or somebody who should no longer have access still having it.
Verification happens before entry, not after. Identity checks, deposits, and signatures completed in the minutes before a stranger walks into somebody's property, which is the same question the vetting chain answers from the supplier side.
Devices do not agree with each other. A lock, a thermostat, and a sensor each have their own model, their own reliability, and their own idea of what being offline means. One adapter per ecosystem, normalising into one internal shape, so the operator never learns which brand produced a reading.
Guests arrive from anywhere. Localisation across eight languages, because a person standing at a door with a phone in an unfamiliar country is the least forgiving user any product has.
What we would expect to deal with on your platform
Not a service list. Four problems that show up on most property platforms, and the decision we made when each showed up on ours.
A marketplace fails on the supply side first. A supplier who loses bid after bid stops opening notifications, and a marketplace with a silent supply side has nothing to sell. Batching is a fairness mechanism before it is load management.
Twenty suppliers are notified about a job and one wins it. The other nineteen have no reason to ever know the address, and if they do, quoting becomes a way to harvest the addresses of occupied homes. Disclosure is staged against job state.
Companies subcontract, so a trust claim that stops at the company is not a trust claim. Verification has to attach to the individual attending, enforced at assignment rather than reviewed afterwards.
A marketplace that only introduces gets disintermediated on the second job. Holding the negotiation, the record, and the money is what keeps the second job on the platform, and it is also what makes a dispute adjudicable.
Trust, money and fairness
Background checks, identity verification, and independent trade accreditation are enforced as a condition of receiving work rather than recorded at onboarding. In the UK that means DBS checks and Checkatrade accreditation, the names a buyer will look for.
Clearance carries an expiry. A supplier whose check has lapsed does not appear with a stale badge. They do not appear.
Verification is retained as a verdict rather than a document: an outcome, a reference, a date, and an expiry, because holding the underlying disclosure content adds no capability and creates a permanent liability.
Card details are captured by the payment provider, Stripe Connect, and never received by the platform, which is a scope decision rather than an integration detail. Data the platform never receives does not have to be defended, audited, or insured.
The price charged comes from the figure negotiated and recorded against the job rather than from anything a browser submits.
Money-moving operations are safe to repeat, so a retried request or a redelivered notification does not charge twice.
Where AI decides who sees a listing, what it says, or what it costs, those are regulated decisions in housing. Recommendation orders an open catalogue rather than deciding which homes exist for a person. Generated copy describes the property and never the occupant. Price is per property, not per applicant, and personalised pricing in housing is a place these platforms deliberately do not go.
The address reaches one supplier, at the point they have a reason for it. Contact details and access instructions are withdrawn after the job. A tenant cannot negotiate their own privacy terms with a supplier they did not choose, so the platform is the only thing standing between their address and everyone who saw the job.
Which trust services criteria this work is judged on
Processing integrity, which is what a marketplace lives on. A trade that happened must be recorded exactly once, in the state it reached, reconciled against the payment provider rather than against the platform's own optimism. Server-side price authority, operations safe to repeat, and every movement reconcilable to the job it belongs to are answers to that question rather than to a security one.
Privacy, because the people most exposed by a property platform are the ones with no account on it.
Confidentiality, in the multi-tenant separation, including the harder half: two companies working a shared job need the job and none of each other's commercial position.
The boundary, stated plainly. The control set is designed against the criteria rather than mapped to them afterwards. That is a statement about how a platform was built, not a claim to hold an attestation, and where a client needs one, the work is theirs to complete with an auditor. We don't claim certifications we don't hold.
What this costs to run
Four things a finance leader should know before committing to a platform like this, each drawn from real work.
No cardholder data means no card data audit scope, which is a cost that never starts rather than one reduced each year.
Graduated dispute remedies mean most disagreements end in a remedy or a credit note rather than a full refund, which keeps value inside the relationship.
Supply widens without recruiting it, because every supplier company that joins brings its own subcontractor workforce.
Volume thresholds applied by rule are claimed by every customer who qualifies, which is more predictable to model than a discount claimed only by those who ask.
What the platforms actually do
Structural facts about the builds rather than measured results. Every one is checkable from the product.
How you'd work with us
Pick the level of ownership that suits you.
Staff augmentation
Add senior marketplace-experienced engineers to your team.
Dedicated team
A committed team that runs like your own.
Full delivery
Hand over the build and we deliver it end to end.
Frequently asked questions
How do you handle supplier vetting and trust?
Verification is enforced as a condition of receiving work, not recorded at onboarding, and clearance carries an expiry, so a lapsed check means the supplier does not appear at all. When a company subcontracts, the trust claim follows the individual: subcontractors are people on the platform with their own checks, and assignment is the gate. What we retain is the verdict, an outcome with a reference, a date, and an expiry, not the underlying disclosure documents.
How do you manage payouts, refunds, and disputes?
The price charged comes from the figure negotiated and recorded against the job, money-moving operations are safe to repeat, and every movement reconciles to the job it belongs to. Disputes have four graduated remedies, remedy the work, credit note, partial refund, or full refund, so most disagreements end in a remedy rather than an all-or-nothing fight, which is what keeps them inside a process.
Can you build for multiple companies or partners on one platform?
Yes, including the harder half of that question: two companies working a shared job need the job and none of each other's commercial position. Separation is structural, with role-based access down to what each party has a reason to see, including staged disclosure of addresses and contact details against job state.
How do you keep AI features on the right side of housing rules?
By treating who is shown a home, what the advertisement says, and what it costs as regulated decisions, because they are. Recommendation orders an open catalogue rather than gating one, generated copy describes the property and never the occupant, and price is per property, not per applicant. Automating a decision moves who has to answer for it, so the platform is built to give an answer.
Building a property platform where trust and money change hands?
Tell us what you're building, and we'll tell you honestly how we'd approach it.