Rude communication
Rude communication, non-payment, monolithic codebase, lack of architecture, no code review, high staff turnover, unchecked developer competence, incomplete design implementation, low security standards, code not transferable.
I would like to warn others against ordering software development services from sjp-asia.group (contacts: sjp-asia.group, kramergedeon - email
, sjpasiagroup - email
; representative — Pavel Pustovit, YouTube: @I_am_Kramer).
Our experience working with this company was negative for the following reasons:
Critically low code quality and architecture
After reviewing three delivered applications, we found monolithic files exceeding 1,000 lines of code, indicating a lack of modularity and component-based design.
The code does not follow common programming patterns or best practices, making maintenance and further development extremely difficult.
Project architecture varies depending on the individual developer, as there are no unified standards or code review processes.
Team and process issues
There is a high turnover of frontend developers.
There is no experienced team lead or software architect overseeing development or ensuring quality.
Based on our observations, developer competencies are often not properly assessed during hiring, which directly affects project outcomes.
Business risks
Project handover is practically impossible.
The delivered code quality is so poor that transferring the project to another team for further development is often not feasible; rebuilding from scratch is usually easier.
Security concerns.
The approach to application security can be described as inadequate, creating potential data leakage risks.
Incomplete design implementation.
Approved UI/UX designs are not fully implemented due to insufficient developer qualifications, resulting in a subpar user experience.
No NDAs or IP agreements.
Developers are not required to sign confidentiality (NDA) or intellectual property agreements. This creates serious risks regarding data leaks, source code ownership, and the legal clarity of rights to the final product.
Business ethics
The company’s management (Pavel Pustovit) demonstrates unprofessional and disrespectful behavior toward employees.
There are reports of unpaid work, which likely explains the high staff turnover and overall attitude toward projects.
Conclusion
Instead of a stable, maintainable product, you are likely to receive an unstable application with numerous defects. Investments in such development are unlikely to pay off and will result in additional costs in the future.
P.S. I am willing to provide additional details and code examples upon request to substantiate the above.