04 — The legal pages: the levers, the dates, the perimeter

The first brief's research, given its correct role: evidence and a floor. These pages make the site useful to a claimant today — and they are the pages with a known expiry date, which shapes how they must be published.

1. The levers, ranked — publish the table whole, including the last row

Lever	Yields	Evidence needed
Cancellation information not given	Cancellation up to 12 months beyond the normal period, and nothing owed for services supplied in it	The sign-up flow as it was, the confirmation, the terms served at the time
Payments taken after cancellation	Full return	The instruction, its date, the payments after
An unfair term	The term does not bind	The terms accepted, and how presented
Care-and-skill failure	Repeat performance or price reduction	Records of what went wrong, when
Misleading action/omission (UCP, in force Apr 2025)	Enforcement and complaint lever	The flow, screenshots, the omission
Card issuer claim	Against the lender too	⚠️ perimeter question — launch without it
Chargeback / DD indemnity	Reversal / bank return	Statements, and speed
"You did not use it"	Nothing on its own	Useful as evidence, never as the claim

"The top row is the product" — it ends the contract and returns money, it is "arithmetic once the evidence exists", and the evidence is a screenshot rather than an opinion. "And the last row is the one to put on the website, in those words."

2. The closing window — the honest version of the pitch

The claim pool is largest now: traders have not yet been forced to tidy sign-up flows, the reach-back is ~13 months, competitors are few. It shrinks from spring 2027 — and the source names the discomfort squarely: "the product's best year is also its least defensible pitch." Publish the window as a fact with its tension, not as urgency marketing. The second act is real: the method transfers to a larger surface with clearer obligations, arriving "with a year of worked cases while everybody else is reading the guidance."

3. The dating discipline — this domain's special obligation

Every legal page carries: an as-at date · a commencement status · the source links · a named owner. The status table itself is content:

	Status
Cooling-off on trial conversion / auto-renewal · renewal reminders · mandatory easy exit	Not in force. Spring 2027 (slipped from autumn 2026 — written statement, 13 Apr 2026)
Unfair commercial practices + direct enforcement (up to 10% global turnover)	In force since 6 Apr 2025
Distance selling cancellation regime	In force since 2014 — the workhorse

"A page describing cooling-off rights that does not say 'not in force until spring 2027' is actively harmful" — and the open question from the source stands: "who owns the dated legal pages? They expire on a known date and a stale page is worse than none." This is the memory-network staleness rule at its sharpest: a stale legal page is a false memory that gets a reader corrected by a trader.

4. The perimeter

General consumer refunds sit outside regulated claims management (the six sectors checked). The card-issuer lever is the one row that may cross — it looks like a financial-services claim — so: launch without it, take advice, add later. Two notes carried into that conversation: contingency fees change how the service looks to a regulator regardless of sector, and representative authority must be captured as evidence, not assumed.

5. What is not retracted, and what is

The first brief's framing (law-as-product) is superseded; none of its research is. The site records that correction openly — "the corpus's value depends on this being said rather than absorbed" — and the correction itself is a good page: it is the estate's brief-supersedes-brief discipline, demonstrated on the site's own founding documents.

This document is released under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International licence (CC BY 4.0).

== briefs/v0.33.62__subscriptions-brief-pack__05__site-architecture-and-the-split.md