Sources and editorial policy

Money content should make it possible to check an important claim. We link material factual statements to relevant sources and distinguish those facts from examples, interpretation and proposed choices.

Use the source that answers the question

For rules, we start with current legislation, regulator documents and official government guidance. For a product, we use the issuer's actual terms, scheme documents, policy wording, rate card or Key Facts Statement. A regulator's homepage alone does not establish a product-specific claim.

Industry education can help explain mechanics, but it does not replace the applicable regulation or contract. A source link is a reference, not an endorsement of SiP Money or a recommendation to buy a product.

Keep dates and assumptions visible

Publication, source-check and rule-effective dates mean different things. We identify the relevant period for tax and rule-sensitive material. Illustrations state their assumptions and limitations; proposed changes are not described as rules already in force.

Review and correct

Author and reviewer names should identify people who performed those roles. A review date should reflect a substantive check. Material changes are corrected visibly, with the reason for the correction where useful. Readers should include the article title, disputed statement and supporting source when reporting an issue through the site's published contact route.

Make commercial interests clear

Any sponsorship, referral arrangement or other material commercial relationship should be disclosed near the relevant content. A comparison should explain what it covers and how it was prepared. Payment should not substitute for factual accuracy or make an unsupported claim acceptable.

What the editorial label means today

“SiP Money editorial” identifies this publication’s content. It is not a professional qualification, a regulator registration or evidence of an independent financial review. Pages must not name an author or reviewer who did not perform that role. Educational examples do not establish personal suitability.

How to read our comparisons

We compare product mechanics, cash dates, access, costs and risks. We do not rank every available provider, supply live rates or claim a complete market survey. A worked example holds its stated assumptions constant; a real contract can use different dates, rounding, charges and conditions. Read the source and the product document together.

Reporting and tracking corrections

Email komnsol@gmail.com with the page URL, disputed passage, relevant source and the date or product terms that apply. For calculators, include reproducible example inputs without account numbers or private documents. An automatic receipt or response time is not promised. Material factual changes should be recorded with the affected page, date and reason; minor spelling or layout edits need not imply a new factual review.

18 October 2026: expanded comparison scope and clarified the editorial label and correction route. Original factual source-check dates remain visible on reused guides.