Free consultation 
Problem
Building a telematics platform is
harder than it looks
Most development teams can set up a backend and display a point on a map. The trouble starts when the platform needs to operate at the scale of thousands of vehicles — with real data, in real time, compliant with the requirements of the TSL industry.
Raw OBD2 data is not ready-made information
Thousands of packets per second — delayed, incomplete, arriving out of order, from devices made by different manufacturers. Turning them into value for a fleet manager requires not just infrastructure, but knowledge of what that data means in the context of a route, a vehicle, and a driving style.
When the problem is an architecture that works at 100 vehicles but breaks at 10,000
Processing data streams from thousands of devices simultaneously, with sub-second response times, demands architectural decisions that simply cannot be made without production-scale experience. Refactoring after the fact costs months.
Industry integrations are a barrier, not a task
SENT — the government system for monitoring the transport of sensitive goods. ZF Transics — a European fleet management platform. Integrating with them is not a matter of reading documentation. It is knowledge earned over years, in production, against real compliance requirements.
Scoring and event detection that makes operational sense
A scoring algorithm that evaluates driving behaviour must be calibrated on real data, across thousands of drivers, taking into account route context and vehicle type. Without that it is worthless — either too sensitive or blind to genuine risks.
The cost of lacking domain expertise
A team with no telematics experience spends 6 to 12 months on problems that have already been solved — interpreting data from different OBD2 devices, synchronising packets, architecting for scale. That is six months to a year of market delay, and an architecture that will likely need to be rewritten once the product starts to grow. Choosing a partner who has already been through it eliminates that phase entirely.
Who it’s for
We work with companies building their own telematics product
Not with fleet managers looking for an off-the-shelf tool. With technology companies that want their own product — but need a partner with deep TSL domain knowledge.
A startup with a fleet product vision
You have a telematics product idea and an early team, but you lack people who understand the specifics of vehicle data, industry integrations, and architecture at scale. You need a partner who can shorten your path to market by years — because they have already solved these problems.
A company that has hit
a technical wall
You have a working product, but the architecture cannot keep up with the growing number of vehicles, integrations are breaking down, or the scoring algorithms make no operational sense. You need a team that knows how to move from PoC scale to enterprise scale.
An organisation entering
the telematics space
You have access to the TSL market — customers, relationships, a distribution channel — and you want to add a telematics component to your offering. You don’t have the expertise to build it from scratch, but you also don’t want to buy a white-label solution you have no control over.
Approach
Three paths to a telematics product. Each comes at a price.
Before you choose a partner, it is worth understanding
what you gain and lose on each path.
In-house build
You recruit a team, build from scratch, and retain full control.
- Full control over the team and roadmap
- Knowledge stays within the organisation
- Process logic: issuance, return, authorisation, timeouts
- Basic infrastructure and CI/CD
- Simplified offline handling (polling)
Generalist software house
You engage a firm that “also does IoT” or “can build anything”.
- Fast start — team available immediately
- Lower financial barrier to entry
- Domain learning curve — you pay for their education
- Architecture designed without production-scale experience
- Risk of mandatory refactoring after 12–18 months
RECOMMENDED APPROACH
A partner with domain expertise
You work with a team that has already solved these problems in production.
- Architecture tested at 50,000 users
- Ready-made patterns for industry integrations
(SENT, ZF Transics) - Time-to-market reduced by months thanks to experience
- Maintenance and development after launch — you are not left on your own
- Less flexibility in team composition than with in-house hiring
- Dependency on an external partner (mitigated by knowledge transfer and code ownership)
Scope
What we build, exactly
The full scope of a telematics platform — from the vehicle data layer to end-user
applications and production maintenance.
Vehicle data layer
Interpretation of raw data from OBD2 devices made by different manufacturers. Handling GSM streams — validation, synchronisation, and reconstruction of packets arriving delayed or in incomplete form.
Real-time processing
An architecture capable of handling hundreds of thousands of devices simultaneously, with sub-1-second response times for analytical queries — regardless of the time range.
Why it’s hard: response time and throughput in a real-time system are architectural decisions that cannot be fixed retroactively. They must be made correctly the first time.
Analytics and Machine Learning
Scoring algorithms for evaluating driving behaviour, detection of 800+ types of road events, ML models for classification, risk forecasting, and generating recommendations for fleet managers.
Why it’s hard: an ML model that is not calibrated on real data from thousands of drivers produces noise, not value. Our models have been trained on production data for years.
Industry integrations
Production experience integrating with SENT (the government system for monitoring the transport of sensitive goods) and ZF Transics (fleet management platform). Integrations with ERP systems, TMS, and client platforms.
Why it’s hard: SENT and ZF Transics are not REST APIs with documentation on GitHub. They are systems with compliance requirements, specific formats, and hard regulatory deadlines.
End-user applications
Web dashboards for fleet managers, mobile apps (Android/iOS) for drivers, analytical dashboards, alert and reporting systems — all integrated with the data layer.
Why it’s hard: an interface for a fleet manager is not a BI dashboard. It must combine real-time and historical data, handle thousands of vehicles in a single view, and remain genuinely useful in the context of day-to-day operations.
Infrastructure and maintenance
Cloud architecture (AWS) with auto-scaling, CI/CD, monitoring, maintenance, and continuous development after launch. Our longest-running project: 10 years and still growing.
Why it’s hard: an ML model that is not calibrated on real data from thousands of drivers produces noise, not value. Our models have been trained on production data for years.
Proof
A system we have been building and maintaining for a decade
For our client we designed and continuously develop an enterprise-grade telematics platform. The system has been running in production for 10 years. It encompasses a web panel for fleet managers, mobile applications for drivers, an analytics layer based on Machine Learning, and integrations with the government SENT system and the ZF Transics platform. The platform has passed independent security audits and is fully GDPR compliant.
Measurable outcomes of the implementation, as reported by the client:
−70%
reduction in claims
−1.1 l/100km
drop in fuel consumption
engagement
measurable increase through gamification
We have been building one system for 10 years. That is not a limitation — it is proof that we can not only start a project, but sustain and grow a complex enterprise-scale platform. More companies can start than can maintain for a decade.
Safety
What we do to reduce your risk
Choosing a technology partner to build a product is a decision that lasts years. We know that — which is why we structure our collaboration so that you are never dependent on a single decision.
The code is yours
The entire source code belongs to you. The repository, documentation, architecture — if you ever decide to take maintenance in-house, you have everything you need to do so.
Continuity, not lock-in
Our longest project has been running for 10 years — because the client wants it that way, not because they have to. We offer maintenance and development, but we do not create dependency. Knowledge is documented and transferable.
Gradual commitment
You do not need to sign a 2-year contract. We start with a discovery and architecture proposal — that is the point at which you decide whether you want to continue working with us.
Technical transparency
Architecture documentation, technology decisions with rationale, regular reviews with your technical team. You are not building with a black box — you are building with a partner who shows what they are doing and why.
Process
From conversation to a working system
We start the collaboration by understanding the product you want to build. On that basis we propose an architecture, choose a stack, and plan the roadmap. We build iteratively — with regular deliveries of working software.
Discovery
Week 1–2
We get to know your product, business model, target audience, and technical requirements. We identify risks, dependencies, and priorities. Outcome: a scope document and a proposed technical approach.
Architecture and planning
Week 2–4
We design the system architecture, select the technology stack, define integrations, and plan the roadmap. This is where you make the decision on scope and timeline.
Iterative build
Week 1–2
We build in sprints, with regular deliveries and demos. Each iteration ends with a working increment that you can test, show to users, and use to adjust direction.
Launch
Depends on scope
Production deployment with monitoring, stabilisation, load testing, and onboarding of first users. We do not leave you alone with the system after deploy.
Maintenance and development
Week 1–2
We build in sprints, with regular deliveries and demos. Each iteration ends with a working increment that you can test, show to users, and use to adjust direction.
Next step
What happens when you reach out
This is not a sales call. It is a technical conversation — we want to understand your product and tell you whether and how we can help.
Technical conversation — 30 minutes
You describe your product, its current state, challenges, and plan. We ask about the architecture, scale, integrations, and roadmap. No sales slides.
Feasibility assessment
Based on the conversation, we assess whether and to what extent we can help. If your case falls outside our competencies — we will tell you plainly.
Proposed approach
If there is a good case for working together, we prepare a proposal: recommended scope, stack, indicative timeline, and engagement model. No commitments at this stage.
FAQ
Questions we get
most often
Do you only have experience with one telematics project?
Yes — and we consider that a strength, not a limitation. One project, but maintained and developed for 10 years, at a scale of 50,000 drivers, covering everything from architecture to ML and integrations with SENT. That represents more domain experience than ten short PoC projects. More companies can start a project than sustain it for a decade at enterprise scale.
Who owns the code?
You do. All source code, documentation, and architecture belong to you. The repository is yours from day one.
If you ever decide to take maintenance in-house, you have everything you need to do so.
What technologies do you use?
We choose the stack based on project requirements, but our production experience is built on AWS, with an event-driven architecture, stream processing, and an ML layer. During discovery we recommend technologies and justify our choices — we do not impose a stack just because “that’s how we do it”.
What if I want to take maintenance in-house later?
We design with transfer in mind. Documentation, architecture decision records, coding standards — everything is prepared so that your team can take over the system. We also offer a transition period with support.
What does the billing model look like?
We typically work on a time & materials basis with regular deliveries and transparent reporting. For projects with a clearly defined scope we can propose a fixed scope model. We discuss the model during discovery — we tailor it to the size
and nature of the project.
How are you different from a generalist software house?
A generalist software house can write code. We can write code that understands the context of vehicle data, knows how to synchronise delayed GSM packets, builds scoring algorithms on real production data, and integrates with systems like SENT and ZF Transics. The difference is not technology — it is domain experience that cannot be caught up on by reading documentation.
Building a telematics product? Let’s talk.
A 30-minute technical conversation. You tell us about your product — we’ll tell you whether and how we can help. No commitments, no sales slides.