Methodology

Every record in this archive begins as a reference to a published source and is worked through a fixed sequence before it can appear publicly. The sequence is the same whether the source is an Ombudsman decision or a public forum post; the difference is in how each is labelled and displayed.

Editorial workflow

1. DISCOVERED
2. SOURCE VERIFIED
3. SUMMARISED
4. EDITORIAL REVIEW
5. PUBLISHED
6. NEEDS RECHECK

The publication gate

A record is only rendered on public pages when all of the following are true. The same check runs at build time against every record, so an incomplete record cannot appear by accident.

• A source URL exists.
• An evidence status and a source tier are set.
• The original source has been reviewed (workflow past "SOURCE VERIFIED").
• The allegation / finding distinction is complete for the record's type.
• The summary has been marked verified (a last-verified date is set).

References that have been identified but not yet verified are listed, with no outcome asserted, on the under-verification index.

Verification statuses

Every source check carries a status describing the source, and separately a note of what happened when this archive tried to open the document. The statuses are: verified — primary or official source; verified — published judgment or authoritative database; verified — original public post; secondary source only; not yet independently verified; and contradicted by source.

A source is only recorded as contradicted where it has been read in full and does not say what was attributed to it. A document that could not be retrieved — blocked, paywalled, dynamically rendered or simply not found by a search — is recorded as a retrieval failure and stays not yet independently verified. Not found never becomes false, and a retrieval failure can never downgrade genuine evidence. This rule is enforced in code: the register refuses to build if an entry is marked as contradicted without the document having been read.

Verifying a source is not the same as verifying what it says. A borrower post can be a verified source while the account within it remains an unverified allegation, and it is labelled that way.

Summaries and quotations

Each summary is a neutral restatement of what the source records, written by this archive. Quotations are kept short and attributed. Where a quotation is disputed, it is checked against the original and any transcription error corrected through the corrections process.

Statistics

All counts shown on the site (decisions found, upheld, not upheld, concerning a given topic, and so on) are computed from the record set at build time. None is entered by hand.

Source tiers

• Tier 1 — Tier 1. Court judgment, regulator, Financial Ombudsman Service or legislation.
• Tier 2 — Tier 2. Official Rooftop, BCM Global or other corporate publication.
• Tier 3 — Tier 3. Reputable journalism or professional commentary.
• Tier 4 — Tier 4. Public forum post, consumer account or review.