Corrections
When something here is wrong it is corrected promptly, the page says that it was corrected, and the correction is listed below. A correction that cannot be found is not a correction.
What gets corrected, and how
- A wrong figure is corrected on the page, and the page keeps the sentence and the document the corrected figure was read from, so the new value can be checked the same way the old one could.
- A wrong claim in an article is corrected in the body of the article, which says what it originally said. The original wording is not deleted and replaced in silence: a reader who saw the first version is entitled to know which part of it to stop relying on.
- A figure a regulator has restated is not a correction of ours. Both values are published with both documents, and the later one is used — see reports.
- A removal is not a correction and is not logged here. Removal is unconditional and nothing about the person is published in order to record that they asked: correct or remove an entry.
To ask for a correction
Email enquiries@assizedata.co.uk with the address of the page and what is wrong with it. If you can say what the right figure is and where it was published, that is faster, but it is not a condition: “this number is not what our annual report says” is enough to start with.
You will get an acknowledgement within five working days. Where the point is plainly right, the page is corrected at the next build, usually the same day. Where it is not plainly right, it is checked against the source and answered either way, within twenty working days. A refusal to correct says why, and quotes what the source actually says.
If you would rather complain than have something corrected, the procedure is at complaints.
The log
29 September 2026 — corrected before launch
Five of these six legal regulators cannot be made to answer a question
What was wrong. The article said the Legal Services Board was a route to data held by the five regulators that are outside the Freedom of Information Act: the LSB is covered by the Act, it oversees those regulators, so what they have given it can be requested from it. That was reasoning from the statute, published without evidence that it worked.
What it says now. Two released requests were then read. The LSB does not hold a list of the practices its regulators regulate ("We are the oversight regulator. You would need to contact the front line regulators directly"), and does not hold figures for prosecutions for unauthorised reserved legal activity. The article now says the route reached neither thing anybody would want from it, and says that it originally said otherwise. The sources page and the underlying data were corrected the same way.
One entry on this log predates publication. It is here rather than discarded because the article itself tells the reader it originally said something else, and a reader who follows that up should be able to find out what. The Assize is edited by Rose Traviss, who is responsible for every correction on this page and for the ones that should have been.