How we approach scam-safety guides
ScammersCheck publishes practical education alongside its checker. This page explains the standard we are adopting for guide quality, sourcing, corrections, and limits. Existing articles are being reviewed against this standard.
Useful before promotional
A guide should help a reader make a safer next decision even if they never use our checker. We prioritise clear warning signs, verification steps, reporting options, and limits over generic reassurance.
Primary and official sources
Where an article makes a specific factual, statistical, regulatory, or reporting claim, it should link to an appropriate primary or official source. Common UK reference points include the national Report Fraud service, the National Cyber Security Centre, and the Financial Conduct Authority.
Clear limitations
A scam-risk result is an indicator, not proof that a person, business, number, or website is legitimate or fraudulent. Guides must not promise outcomes, substitute for professional advice, or encourage readers to share sensitive data publicly.
Corrections and review
Readers can request a correction, removal review, or privacy review through our Contact and Corrections route. We will update or clarify content where a substantiated issue is identified.
We will not invent author credentials, regulator relationships, safety guarantees, or case-study results. Where an article needs a qualified specialist review, it will say so rather than imply one occurred.