What counts as a correction

Not every change to published content is a correction. A correction is the public acknowledgment and fix of an error in published material.

These are corrections

• A factual error — a wrong number, name, date, regulation, or source
• A misquoted source — words attributed to someone they didn’t say
• A miscalculation in a calculator (logic error, wrong threshold, formula bug)
• A material misinterpretation of HMRC guidance, government policy, or financial rules
• A legal or regulatory issue (defamatory statement, privacy breach, etc.)

These are NOT corrections

• Style edits (punctuation, formatting, typo fixes that don’t change meaning) — silently improved without announcement
• Updates to reflect new information (e.g. a Budget changes a rate the article cited correctly at the time) — handled with an Update Note on the article, not a correction
• Refinements based on reader feedback that improve clarity but don’t change facts — silently improved
• Pre-publication errors caught by the verification process — these are internal-process issues, not public-facing corrections

Things that will NOT be changed in response to a correction request

• Editorial opinion that I stand behind
• Legitimate criticism of public figures, institutions, or products, where the criticism is supported by evidence
• Accurate coverage of facts that someone simply wishes hadn’t been published

A correction is for facts that are wrong — not for analysis someone disagrees with.

Severity tiers and response times

Three tiers, with specific commitments for each. Tier is assigned when the report comes in, based on the criteria below.

Acknowledged means a reply confirming the report has been received and the issue is being investigated. Published means the correction appears on the affected page.

How to report an error

Email contact@mjburrows.com with:

• The URL of the affected page
• The specific claim, number, or quote that’s wrong
• The correct information (where you can show it)
• A source for the correction (HMRC link, gov.uk page, original document)

The more specific the report, the faster the fix. Vague reports (“something seems wrong with the IHT calculator”) will get a request for clarification before the SLA clock starts.

Anonymous reporting

If you need to report an error anonymously — perhaps because you’re an employee of a company covered in an article, you work in a regulated profession, or you have other reasons not to be identified — you can email from a free email account created for the purpose (Gmail, ProtonMail, etc.).

The corrections process treats anonymous reports the same as identified ones. The source of a correction is verified by the substance of the claim and any supporting documentation, not by the identity of the reporter.

Anonymity does not lower the evidence bar — but it does not raise it either. A well-evidenced anonymous report is acted on the same way as a well-evidenced identified one.

What happens after you report

Five-step process:

• 1. Report received. Email lands at contact@mjburrows.com.
• 2. Triage. Severity assigned (Tier 1, 2, or 3) based on the criteria above.
• 3. Verification. The claim is checked against the source you’ve cited (or against primary sources if none provided). For calculator errors, the calculation is re-run against HMRC’s published worked example where one exists.
• 4. Decision and acknowledgment. A reply confirming whether the report is accepted, rejected (with reasoning), or needs more information. If accepted, an estimated correction date.
• 5. Publication. The correction is made on the affected page using the notation convention below, and logged in the public corrections log.

How corrections appear on fixed content

When a correction is published, it’s notated openly on the affected page. The original error is preserved in the correction notice — we don’t pretend it never happened.

News articles

Calculators

Guides

Corrections to guides are added to the guide’s existing Update Log section, with the date and a description of what changed and why.

When content is removed instead of corrected

Some errors can’t be fixed with a correction notice — they require the content to be removed entirely. Removal is the exception, not the default. The criteria:

• Legal removal. Content found to be defamatory, in breach of UK privacy law, or otherwise legally indefensible. Removal is immediate; a removal notice is published in its place.
• Ongoing harm. Content that, while accurate at the time of publication, is now causing demonstrable ongoing harm to a named individual that outweighs the public interest in keeping it available.
• Deceased subjects. Where coverage of a now-deceased individual creates issues for surviving family that outweigh the public interest, removal may be appropriate.
• Materially incorrect consent or context. Where a subject can demonstrate the content was published with materially incorrect consent (e.g., a quote given off the record was published on the record).

Where content is removed, a removal notice replaces the original at the same URL, explaining that the content has been removed and the reason category (without restating what was removed). The removal is logged in the corrections log.

Right of reply

Where an article names a specific individual, company, or institution and is critical or otherwise consequential, the subject is offered a right of reply.

In practice:

• For breaking news where time is of the essence, the subject is contacted via published contact channels for comment ahead of publication. If no response is received within a reasonable window, the article publishes with a note that comment was sought.
• For analysis pieces, longer notice may be given.
• After publication, any subject who feels they were misrepresented or whose response was not adequately captured can request that their reply be appended to the article. Reasonable requests are honoured promptly.

Right of reply is not a veto over coverage — it’s an opportunity to ensure the subject’s view is fairly represented alongside the reporting.

Disputes and escalation

If you’ve reported an error and disagree with the response — either because it’s been rejected and you think the rejection is wrong, or because the correction was made differently from what you proposed — there are two paths:

Direct re-engagement

Reply to the original email with the disagreement, including any additional source material that supports your case. The report will be re-reviewed.

External oversight

MJBurrows is not currently a member of IPSO (Independent Press Standards Organisation) or IMPRESS, the two recognised UK press regulators. There is no external press-standards complaint process specific to MJBurrows at this time. Joining a self-regulator is something I’m considering as the site grows; if and when that changes, this page will be updated.

For complaints relating to specific external regulators:

• Data protection issues — the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) at ico.org.uk
• Concerns that any content constitutes unregulated financial advice — the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) at fca.org.uk

The corrections log

Every correction made on this site is logged here, in date order (most recent first). The log includes:

• Date the correction was published
• The affected URL
• Brief description of the error
• Brief description of the correction
• Reporter name (if they have consented to be credited)

As of 20 April 2026, no corrections have been published.

This page will be updated each time a correction is made.

Annual transparency reporting

Each calendar year, a summary report is published on this page covering:

• Total number of corrections published in the year
• Breakdown by severity tier
• Average time from report to publication, by tier
• Number of correction reports rejected, with category-level reasons
• Number of pieces removed entirely, with category-level reasons
• Notable patterns or systemic issues identified, and what’s being changed in response

The first transparency report will be published in January 2027, covering the period from site launch to end of 2026. The aim is accountability through measurement — not just claiming we handle errors well, but showing the data behind it.

Archive and preservation

When an article is corrected, the corrected version replaces the original at the same URL. The original (incorrect) text is not retained on the live page, but the correction notice on the corrected page records what was changed.

For accountability, the original published version of any corrected article is preserved internally and can be made available on request to readers who want to verify what was originally published.

Significant corrections and removals are also preserved publicly via the Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine (archive.org), which captures snapshots of the site over time. Readers can use the Wayback Machine to view the site as it appeared on any past date.

Where content is removed entirely, the URL displays a removal notice rather than the original content, but the fact of removal — with the reason category — is logged in the corrections log above for transparency.

Contact

All correction reports go to contact@mjburrows.com. The same address handles all editorial enquiries.