Symptom

The form said thank you. Nobody received anything.

This is the failure that costs real money, because it is invisible from the inside: the visitor is thanked, you are not notified, and no record exists of the ones you never saw. How far back it goes is generally the first thing we establish.

Book my audit

Forms submit and nothing arrives

What it looks like

The fields validate, the button shows its pending state, the confirmation appears. No message reaches you, no row appears in any table, no entry lands in a log. Submitting it yourself produces the same reassuring outcome, so the first real evidence is a customer mentioning they wrote to you a fortnight ago.

Why it actually happens

That confirmation is a piece of interface rather than a report from the server, and generated code routinely shows it without waiting to hear anything back. Behind it sits one of a few causes: no endpoint at the other end, a handler that returns early on an error it discards, a mail provider refusing an unverified sending domain, or a database write rejected by a rule whose response nobody reads.

How we find out which one it is

We submit the form while watching the outgoing request and the server log at the same moment. That separates the causes at once: whether a request left the browser, whether anything answered, what status came back, and whether the provider or the database recorded an attempt. Then we compare how many submissions exist anywhere against how many you knew about.

What the fix touches

The submit path from one end to the other: a handler that does the work, a response the interface waits for before it claims success, an error the visitor can act on, and somewhere durable to record the submission before anything is emailed. Storage and notification stop depending on one another, so a mail outage no longer loses the enquiry with it.

Where we see this most

Can you recover the submissions I lost?

Sometimes. Where a request reached the server, the host's logs may hold enough to reconstruct who wrote to you and when, and we look there first because those logs expire. Where nothing was ever sent, there is nothing to recover and we say so rather than charging you to find out.

Why did my own test come back fine?

Because the part you tested is the part that works. The confirmation is drawn by the page and does not depend on the outcome, so the only meaningful test is one that goes and checks the other end for a record.

Do I need a paid mail service for this?

For anything a customer sends you, yes, and it need not be an expensive one. Mail from an unverified domain is filtered before a person sees it, which is the same result as losing the message while appearing to work.

How it works

Audit

$199~~$349~~promo

You send a link, a repo, or both. We reproduce the problem, read the code, and record a short walkthrough: what's broken, why it broke, and what it takes to fix. You get written findings and a fixed quote.

Book my audit

Full Fix

Priced after the audit

Scoped from the audit and agreed before anything starts. We fix the cause rather than the symptom, and hand back something maintainable, with a written note on what changed and why.

Nobody can price this honestly before seeing the code. The audit is what makes a firm number possible.

The audit is a fixed price and you know it before you pay. Everything after it is quoted from what the audit actually found, and you approve the number before any work starts.

Why trust us with it

What we can show you is who does the work, what it costs, and how well we already know the failure you are staring at.

A desk at night, the walkthrough being recorded

A small agency, not a marketplace

This is run by a small web agency. The person who records your audit is the person who does the fix, so you're not being routed to an anonymous bidder.

$199~~$349~~promo

The audit stands on its own

Plenty of people take the findings and do the work themselves, or hand them to their own developer. That is a fine outcome and nothing is bundled to stop it.

Book my audit

Fixed price, agreed up front

You approve a number before work starts. If the job turns out harder than we estimated, that's ours to absorb, not a change order.

Built with one of these? You're in the right place.

Lovable: Lovable projects usually break at the Supabase edge: environment variables that never reached production, or row-level security left open on a table that holds real customer data.
Bolt: Bolt ships fast and leaves the build config behind. The deploy fails on a missing package, a Node version, or an API key that only ever existed in the preview.
Replit: Replit apps run fine in the workspace and 500 on a real domain: ports, file paths and secrets that were never wired up for the deployed process.
Cursor: Cursor edits confidently across files it has not read. Two features end up disagreeing about the same state, and the bug moves every time you fix it.
v0: v0 gives you the interface, not the wiring. Forms post to nothing, server actions are still stubs, and auth is a component rather than a session.
Windsurf: Windsurf refactors reach further than intended. Imports, types and routes drift apart until the build stops on something unrelated to what you changed.
Base44: Base44 apps hit their ceiling at data and roles: the model that fit the demo cannot carry a second kind of user without redoing what sits underneath it.
Claude Code: Claude Code writes real code, which means real dependencies, migrations and tests. When it breaks, it breaks somewhere prompting cannot reach.

What it usually turns out to be

It works locally, then 500s once deployed: Nearly always an environment variable, a build step or a file path that only exists on your machine. The code is usually fine.
The AI keeps fixing the same bug: Each pass patches the symptom because the cause sits a layer down, in the data model or in how state is shared. Prompting harder does not reach it.
Forms submit but nothing arrives: The browser gets a success back while the server quietly fails. Without error handling and logs nobody finds out until a customer complains.
Logins drop or leak between users: Session and auth code copied from an example built for a different rendering model. It looks right in testing and breaks under real traffic.

And what nobody notices until later

Security is the part an AI builder is quietest about. None of these stop the app working, which is exactly why they ship.

The database is open to anyone with the URL: Supabase and Firebase hand the browser a key on purpose — the row policies are what actually guard the data. Generated projects routinely ship with those policies off, which turns a public key into a key to everything.
Secrets that shipped to the browser: A service key pasted into a component, or one prefixed NEXT_PUBLIC_ so the build would stop complaining. It is in the page source, readable in devtools, and the bill for it is yours.
Any logged-in user can read every other user's data: The endpoint takes an id and returns that record without ever asking whose it is. Nothing looks wrong while you are the only account; change the number in the URL and you are in someone else's.
Nothing stops the same request a thousand times over: No rate limit and no real validation on the public routes, so login, password reset and checkout can each be hammered until something gives. Generated code almost never adds this on its own.

If you recognised your own problem somewhere above, that is the point. The audit is where you find out which one it actually is.

Book my audit

$199~~$349~~promo

Send it over. We'll tell you what's wrong.

One fixed-price audit at $199 instead of $349. A video walkthrough, written findings and a firm quote on what it takes to fix.

Book my audit