Methodology · v1.0
Every line has a source. This is how each one is produced.
A SafeToPay report compares what a website says with what public registers record, and shows both. This page sets out exactly what we read, how we compare it, how a verdict is decided and where the method stops. It is written for the person who received a report and wants to know how it was made — including business owners.
In one sentence
We identify the legal entity behind a website, read its public record, extract the claims the website makes about itself, put the two side by side, and give you a verdict with the evidence attached.
What a report is not. It is not an opinion, a rating, a scam list or a recommendation. Every line is either a fact from a named public source or a comparison between two such facts. A business can add context to a report; it cannot change a fact, a date or a verdict.
The four steps
-
1
Identify the legal entity
We look for a company number on the website first. If there isn’t one, we use the VAT number, the postcode, the directors’ names on the “about” page and the domain registrant, and search Companies House for a match. If no match reaches our confidence threshold, the report says
No UK company identified. We never guess. -
2
Read the official record
With the company identified, we pull its Companies House profile, filing history, officers and accounts; check the VAT number with HMRC; read the domain’s registration record from Nominet (or RDAP for non-UK domains); look up the site’s history in the Internet Archive; and look for reviews on the public platforms. Each source is listed in the table below, with what we take from it.
-
3
Read the website
We fetch the home page, about, contact, services and terms pages, and extract the statements a business makes about itself: years trading, staff numbers, “our own workshop” or factory, number of projects completed, trade scheme logos, contact details and the type of map link. Every extracted claim keeps its original wording so it can be quoted back in the report.
-
4
Compare, decide, explain
Each claim is tested against the register using the fixed rules below. The signals that result decide the verdict, size the safe deposit and select the three questions. The summary is assembled from those signals; nothing in it is written freehand.
Sources
What we read, what we take from it, and what happens if the source does not answer.
| Source | What we take | Freshness | If unavailable |
|---|---|---|---|
| Companies House Open Government Licence v3 | Legal name, number, status, type, incorporation date, previous names, registered address, SIC codes, accounts type and due dates, confirmation statement, Gazette notices, insolvency history, officers and their other appointments, persons with significant control, charges | Updated within 24 h of a filing | Report marked incomplete; verdict capped at amber |
| HMRC VAT checker | Whether the VAT number on the site is valid and which name it is registered to | Live | Row shows “Could not be checked” |
| Nominet / RDAP | Domain creation date, registrant name and type, registrar, last change of ownership | Live | Domain age shown as “Not published” |
| Internet Archive | First capture of the site, number of distinct months captured, most recent capture, whether the archived site was the same business | Depends on capture frequency | Row shows “Could not be checked”; treated neutrally |
| Google Business, Trustpilot, Houzz, Checkatrade | Review count, rating, age of oldest review, profile age, whether the listed address matches the register | Live; some platforms block automated reads | Row shows which platform blocked the check; no penalty applied |
| Google Ads Transparency Center, Meta Ad Library | The verified name and country paying for the brand’s adverts, and whether it matches the company above | Live | Payer shown as “unknown”; the “no company” rule cannot fire |
| Trade registers Gas Safe, NICEIC, NAPIT, FENSA, CERTASS, TrustMark, FCA | Whether a scheme claimed on the website exists on the register, its number and expiry, and whether it is registered to the same company | Live | Row shows “Not checked yet” |
| The website itself | Claims, contact details, scheme logos, image characteristics, tracking tags, template leaks, text matches against other sites | At the time of the check | Report marked incomplete; verdict capped at amber |
Claim comparisons
These are the tests we run between the website and the register. A discrepancy is only recorded where both sides are known; a missing fact is never treated as a contradiction.
| Website says | Register shows | Recorded as |
|---|---|---|
| “N years” trading, established, founded | Company incorporated fewer than N years ago | Discrepancy (years) |
| Staff of 5 or more | Latest accounts report 2 employees or fewer | Discrepancy (staff) |
| Own workshop, factory, manufacture, handmade | No manufacturing SIC code (16, 25, 31, 32) registered | Discrepancy (workshop) |
| 100+ projects completed | Company under 3 years old | Discrepancy (projects) |
| Company number shown | Number matches / does not match the identified company | Confirmation or discrepancy |
| Trade scheme logo | No entry on that scheme’s register | Discrepancy (licence) |
| Advertised brand | Adverts paid for by a different legal entity or country | Signal (payer) |
The free report shows the first discrepancy in full. The full report shows all of them.
How the verdict is decided
The rules are evaluated in order: red first, then amber, then green. If none applies, the result is amber. A rule can only fire on evidence that was actually retrieved — a source that did not answer can never turn a report red.
- No UK legal entity found, and the website was read, and Companies House answered, and the advertiser register shows no payer either
- The site is a copy of another business’s website (template or text leak)
- The domain is a look-alike of another checked brand
- Accounts overdue at Companies House
- A strike-off notice published in the Gazette
- A current director with two or more companies dissolved in the last five years
- Company incorporated less than 12 months ago
- No UK company identified (without the conditions for red)
- Companies House could not be queried
- The website could not be read
- Registered address shared with a large number of companies (registration or serviced-office address)
- At least one claim discrepancy
- No Google reviews
- Mobile phone number only
- More than 60% of gallery images are renders or graphics rather than photographs
- Adverts paid for by a different legal entity
- UK company identified and Companies House answered
- Incorporated 3 years ago or more
- Accounts not overdue
- 5 or more Google reviews, the oldest at least 12 months old
- Registered address not a mass-registration address
- No claim discrepancies
Green does not mean perfect. It means the public record is consistent and nothing on the website contradicts it. A genuine, long-established firm can still be late or over budget. What it is unlikely to be is fictional.
The safe deposit figure
The figure answers one question: how much could this company realistically return if the job fell through? It is derived from the company’s own filed balance sheet, not from the size of the quote.
If the latest accounts do not report total assets less current liabilities — common for dormant companies and some micro-entities — the report says Not determinable and recommends staged payments, escrow or a credit card for at least £100 of the total (Section 75 protection). The figure is guidance for sizing an up-front payment; it is not a valuation or a credit limit.
The three questions
The full report includes three questions to send to the business before paying. They are selected from a fixed list according to the strongest signals in the report — for example, a workshop discrepancy triggers “Where is the workshop and can I visit it?”; a young company triggers “Which legal entity will the contract and invoice be in?”. A genuine firm answers each in a sentence. A firm that changes the subject has told you something.
What we cannot see
- Sole traders and partnerships without a limited company have no Companies House record. The report will say so; it is not a mark against them.
- Companies outside the UK — we identify them where the site says so, but do not read foreign registers.
- Very recent filings — Companies House updates within 24 hours; a check run in that window may miss a filing.
- Blocked sources — some review platforms and some websites refuse automated reads. The report names the source and applies no penalty.
- Quality of work — nothing in a public register tells you whether a firm is good at its job. Reviews help; the register does not.
The rules for businesses
A business can
- Request a correction of any fact or date, with evidence
- Ask for a re-check after filing accounts or changing details
- Display the free badge and link to its report
A business cannot
- Change a verdict or remove a fact that comes from a public register
- Pay for a colour, a ranking or a badge
- Have a report withdrawn because it is unfavourable
Corrections are answered within 48 hours. Where a source is wrong, we correct the report and re-run the check; where a source is right, the line stays. Request a correction.
Data protection
Reports contain information about companies and their officers taken from public registers, published under their respective licences. Directors’ dates of birth are shown as month and year only, as Companies House publishes them. We do not collect information about consumers who run checks beyond what is needed to deliver a report they have paid for. See our privacy notice.
Changelog
- v1.0 · 2026-09First published methodology. Verdict rules, claim comparisons and safe deposit formula as documented above. Trade registers, advertiser registers and copied-content checks being rolled out; rows show “Not checked yet” until live.
See it applied to a real company
Free, no sign-up, about a minute.
Enter a website address, e.g. aurelia-kitchens.co.uk