Generative AI development for UK teams that ship.

Strong. India Standard Time is GMT+5:30, which gives roughly four to five hours of native daily overlap with UK business hours — our 1:30pm IST is your 8am GMT, our 6:30pm IST is your 1pm GMT. Daily standups, twice-weekly demos with eval-run numbers, and ad-hoc debugging on a regression all land inside UK business hours without late-night calls on either side. Written async updates with the previous night's eval results go out daily before your standup, so you walk into the day already knowing what regressed.

Yes. Engagement defaults align with UK GDPR, the Data Protection Act 2018, and ICO published guidance on AI and automated decision-making. Every model and tool call is audit-logged with input, output, prompt version, and operator identity — exportable for ICO inspection. A Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) is run for any system processing personal data at scale or producing legal or similarly significant effects on a data subject. We also track the EU AI Act and the UK government's pro-innovation framing on AI regulation so the system is structurally ready for the controls that land next.

Yes. We sign UK GDPR-aligned Data Processing Agreements covering the Article 28 processor obligations: processing only on documented instructions, confidentiality of personnel, security of processing, sub-processor management, data subject rights assistance, breach notification, and deletion or return of personal data at the end of the engagement. International transfers of personal data are covered by the UK International Data Transfer Agreement (IDTA) or the EU Standard Contractual Clauses with the UK addendum. We will work from your DPA template or provide ours.

Yes — that is the most common UK deployment pattern we run. We work inside your AWS, Azure, or GCP account in any UK or EU region you specify, using your IAM, your VPC, and your customer-managed encryption keys. For inference, we route to UK or EU endpoints on Claude (Anthropic) and GPT-4o (Microsoft Azure OpenAI Service in UK South), or we self-host Llama 3 70B or 8B on vLLM inside your VPC if your team requires zero third-party inference. We do not silently route UK personal data through non-UK endpoints.

Either. Most repeat UK clients move to a Master Services Agreement after the first engagement so subsequent generative AI builds, fine-tuning work, evaluation work, and on-call retainers ship under a per-project Statement of Work without renegotiating the umbrella terms. For a first engagement, a standalone SOW with the DPA appended is the standard pattern. Legal turnaround is usually one to two weeks depending on your DPO's review cadence.

Because prompt-engineering without an eval harness is opinion-driven development. You change the prompt, the demo looks better on the three queries you tested, you ship, and the system regresses on the four hundred queries you did not test. The eval harness — agreed against your acceptance criteria in week one — gates every prompt change against quantitative quality, refusal rate, hallucination rate, cost, and latency before the change reaches production. It is the single largest reason our generative builds hold up past launch where consultancy proofs-of-concept disintegrate.

Most v1 generative AI engagements at Aiinfox land between £20,000 and £100,000 fixed-price for a focused build — an LLM copilot, a RAG system, an agentic workflow, or a voice pipeline. Larger multi-quarter engagements with fine-tuning, custom evals, and FCA-aware compliance work typically reach £150,000 to £250,000. The cost difference versus a London AI consultancy lands roughly 30 to 50 percent lower on senior rates — but the headline is the engineer on your kickoff call writes your code, not a junior at the consultancy's offshore arm.

Yes — takeover audits are routine. Step one is reading the code, the prompts, the eval results (if any exist), the guardrails, and the cost telemetry. Step two is shipping the smallest valuable change — usually an eval harness, a refusal layer, or a guardrail upgrade — to prove we understand the system. Step three is the longer-term plan: incremental stabilisation, a parallel rebuild, or shutting it down and starting over. Most takeovers we see did not need a full rewrite; they needed evals, guardrails, observability, and a senior engineer on the build.