We know what gets rejected because we apply the criteria.

We gather and review material datasheets from our customers' supply base, checking them against IMDS recommendations, customer-specific requirements and regulatory standards. We have written validation rules and trained global supplier networks on submission quality.

Most vendors learn the rules from documentation. We learn them from the submissions that fail.

We chase the data your suppliers do not send.

Collection is where most IMDS programmes stall. A declaration is requested, nothing comes back, and the deadline arrives anyway. We have spent nineteen years managing supplier and sub-tier follow-up at scale — structured escalation, persistent chasing, and visible progress reporting against your submission dates.

It is unglamorous work, and it is usually the difference between a programme that lands on time and one that does not.

We build the process around your systems, not ours.

No two compliance operations run the same way. We design customised workflows that integrate with the systems, naming conventions and approval routes you already use, so our work arrives in a form your team can act on without rekeying or reconciliation.

Every stage of the IMDS lifecycle, in one place.

Collection, validation, creation, submission, ongoing maintenance and training — we cover the full lifecycle rather than a single step. Nineteen years in one industry means we already know your customer's submission requirements before the first call.

Chemists and chemical engineers, not data entry staff.

Material composition is a chemistry problem. Our team holds degrees in chemistry and chemical engineering. When a supplier declaration is ambiguous, they can tell you why — not just flag it.

We work alongside your team, not instead of it.

We are engaged as additional capacity. Your staff keeps ownership of customer relationships and live production; we absorb backlog, spikes around engineering change, and regulatory surges.