Independent review publisher. We do not recover funds or guarantee outcomes.Editorial questions: [email protected]

Review methodology

Our objective is not to make every provider fit a score. It is to publish ratings only when the evidence can support them.

1. Publication threshold

A company-specific rating is withheld unless we can establish a minimum factual record: the provider's operating identity or responsible entity, service scope, pricing/fee structure, material recovery claims, contact channels and sufficient evidence to assess consumer safeguards.

Important: A missing rating does not mean a company is safe or unsafe. It means our evidence threshold for scoring has not been met.

2. Weighted criteria

CriterionWeightWhat we examine
Identity & governance25%Legal entity clarity, responsible operators, public footprint, jurisdiction and consistency of business information.
Claims & evidence25%Whether success claims, partnerships, credentials and recovery capabilities are specific, supportable and appropriately qualified.
Fee transparency20%Upfront charges, retainers, contingencies, refund terms, third-party costs and whether payment terms are clear before engagement.
Consumer safeguards20%Privacy, credential handling, custody boundaries, complaints, cancellation, conflict disclosures and pressure tactics.
Complaint handling10%Pattern, recency, response quality, evidence supplied by both sides and signs that issues are resolved rather than ignored.

3. Evidence hierarchy

  1. Primary records: government, court, regulator, corporate registry, company contracts and direct documentary evidence.
  2. First-party materials: company website, pricing, policies, terms, public statements and written responses.
  3. Independent reporting: reputable publications and specialist research with transparent sourcing.
  4. User reports: useful as signals, but not treated as verified facts without supporting evidence.

4. Claims, complaints and allegations

We distinguish allegations from established facts. A complaint alone does not prove wrongdoing, and a company denial alone does not disprove a complaint. Material negative findings should be supported by the strongest available evidence and presented with relevant context.

5. Updates and corrections

Pages carry a visible update date. Reviewed organizations and readers can send supporting documentation to [email protected]. Material verified changes are incorporated and, when appropriate, logged on our corrections page.

6. Commercial independence

Advertising, referral or sponsorship arrangements — if used — must be disclosed. A commercial relationship cannot buy a better editorial rating, suppress a material finding, or prevent a correction.