What is the method for a SwiftWill guide?
Find the question a person actually asks and answer it at the top, at the length the question needs. Support the answer with the statute or GOV.UK page, checked that day. Add a table where people need to compare situations, fees or rules. Link related guides in both directions. Stop if the page would duplicate another URL.
- Check the slug registry so we never publish a second page for one query.
- Fetch the primary source on the day: legislation.gov.uk, GOV.UK, HMCTS, HMRC, the Office of the Public Guardian, the Law Commission.
- Write question-shaped headings with a self-contained answer under each.
- Put competitor prices only where the provider still publishes them.
- If a solicitor is the right route for some readers, say so before any link to buy.
- List the sources at the end with the date they were checked, and record any correction in the corrections log.
What should a guide help you do?
A source explains the rule; a useful guide also helps you recognise which question to ask next. Our review checklist asks whether the page answers its main question, explains its limits and gives a practical next step. A longer page is useful only when the extra detail helps that task.
- Accuracy: check the applicable jurisdiction, source, exceptions and date of any changing figure.
- Useful explanation: explain the decision or preparation involved, rather than simply restating a source.
- Evidence and limits: distinguish published provider claims, software checks and individual professional advice.
- Next steps: link to the relevant guide, practical resource or advice route without making readers repeat their search.
For example, the guide to updating a will separates preparation from actually changing a signed document. The annotated sample explains a fictional document, and the executor handover helps organise practical records. Illustrations are labelled as fictional; they are not customer stories or a prediction of a court decision.
How are existing guides reviewed?
A changed source, a reported error or an unclear explanation can prompt a focused review. We keep useful material and improve the affected section. A source monitor can flag a change, but a successful technical check does not establish that legal guidance is correct. The page update date records a content change; each source-check date records the scope actually checked.
These editorial checks are not independent legal approval. SwiftWill's guides and will templates have not had a full independent legal review, and automated preparation does not include a solicitor reviewing an individual customer's will. The editorial policy explains these limits.
Where do the numbers come from?
Statutory figures (intestacy legacy, probate court fee, IHT bands) come from gov.uk or legislation, with the date we checked. Survey ranges for will ownership are labelled as ranges because YouGov, IRN and Will Aid do not ask identical questions. We publish the underlying tables as CSV on open data.
What will SwiftWill not publish?
We will not invent a statistic, scrape a forum and rewrite it as our voice, mark up competitor star ratings as our Review, or date-stamp a page without changing it. We will not tell an unmarried couple that "common-law marriage" will save them. That claim is false in England and Wales.
Full policy: editorial policy. Citation checks: how we check AI citations. Founder: Kaiser Khan.