Corrections Policy
Last updated: July 2026
This site publishes guidance that people act on when they have money at risk. Getting something wrong here is not a typo — it can send someone down the wrong path at the worst moment of their year. So we would rather be corrected than be consistent.
This page states what we do about errors. It is not aspirational: everything below is already how we work.
How to report an error
Email press@tuteladigitalis.com with the page and what is wrong. You do not need to prove it or explain it formally — pointing at it is enough, and we will do the checking.
We would particularly like to hear from an organisation that believes we have described its policy incorrectly, and from any researcher or journalist who finds a figure that does not hold up.
What we do when something is wrong
- Anything that could cause harm is fixed first and fast. A wrong reporting route, an expired deadline, or a claim that would send someone to the wrong authority gets corrected as soon as we confirm it, ahead of anything else we are doing.
- We correct the claim everywhere it appears — not only the sentence you found. A single fact on this site can also live in a page summary, a structured-data block, a downloadable dataset and a related article. A correction is not finished until every one of those agrees.
- We change the date when we change the substance. Pages carry a review or updated date, and it moves when the content genuinely moves — never to look fresher than it is.
- If a correction changes the meaning, we say so on the page rather than editing quietly. A reader who acted on the old version deserves to know it changed.
What counts as a source
Where we state what an organisation does, we take it from that organisation's own published guidance or a named regulator, and we link it so you can check rather than trust us. Where an organisation publishes an exact line, we quote it; otherwise we paraphrase and attribute. We do not invent quotes, and we do not attribute a figure to an agency that did not publish it.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence
Some of our reference data records that we could not find a published policy or scheme. That is a search result, not a proven absence — no authority publishes a statement that it has never created something. Where this distinction matters, our datasets record it explicitly rather than collapsing it into a failing grade, and we would rather look less decisive than overstate what we know.
Third-party information goes stale
Deadlines pass and official portals are not always updated by the bodies that run them. We have found a programme still advertising a deadline that had already expired on the administrator's own site. We check dates against the current date rather than against what a page says, and we would rather tell you a programme has closed than let you rush at a door that is already shut.
What we will not do
- We will not remove an accurate, sourced statement because a company objects to it. We will always correct an inaccurate one.
- We will not quietly delete a page to make an error disappear.
- We will not publish a statistic we cannot trace to a named source, even when it would make a stronger story.
Reuse
Our reference datasets are published under CC BY 4.0 and are free to cite. If you are relying on one for research or a story and want to confirm a row before you publish, write to us — we would rather answer the question first than correct the record afterwards.
One person researches, writes and checks this site. That makes an outside correction more valuable here, not less.