Editorial Policy: 90-Day Reviews, Gov-Source Citations

This editorial policy sets out four public guardrails we run on every page: each factual claim links to a primary government source, a named adviser reviews the page, we re-check it within 90 days, and we fix any error you report. We publish them because the niche is full of sites that promise “accuracy” but never say who checks, how often, or how to complain.

How we source and cite every claim

In short: every fee, timeline and rule links inline to a primary government page — immigration.gov.ng, gov.uk, canada.ca or travel.state.gov — never to a forum or a blog. Source: our editorial policy; primary-source rule.

We place the government page that sets the rule beside the claim, so you can verify it. Where lived experience differs — a backlog, a portal error — we quote dated peer reports and label them as reports, not rules. We do not invent fees or approval rates; with no source, we write “no confirmed figure.”

Who reviews each page

In short: a named specialist reviews every immigration page and signs the byline. UK advisers are verified on the Immigration Advice Authority (IAA) register, Canada advisers on the CICC register. Source: reviewer profiles, experts.

You see the reviewer’s name, role and register link on the page and on our experts page — never an anonymous “our team.” We route you to a licensed adviser for advice on your own case; we do not represent applicants for reward. Where a page has had no specialist review, we say so at the top; our registered entity is on the about page.

How often we refresh — the 90-day cadence

In short: we re-check every visa page within 90 days, and volatile UK, Canada and NIS rule pages sooner when a rule changes. The “Last updated” date is the real review date — we never back-date a page. Source: our editorial policy (90-day cadence).

Visa rules move often, so a stale page is a wrong page. The visible “Last updated” date is set when a human last re-checked the sources — not an auto-stamp or a faked date. On a fee rise or a new UK dependent rule, we update the affected pages at once. Most sites keep this cadence private; we state it so you (and any AI engine citing us) can judge a page’s currency.

Our no-guaranteed-outcome pledge

In short: we never promise a visa, a “100% approval” or a “secured” slot — no one outside the deciding government can. Anyone who guarantees a visa for an upfront fee is running the exact scam we teach you to avoid. Source: anti-scam guide.

A guaranteed outcome is both a compliance line we will not cross and the clearest sign of a fake agent. Consular officers decide cases; an agent controls none of that. Nigerians report losing ₦500,000 to ₦2.8 million to “agents” who promised approval, then went silent (Nairaland, 2023–2025). We give the real route and honest odds — our guide to UK visa refusal reasons is written that way, explaining what a refusal letter means rather than what an agent claims to undo. If a page reads like a promise, report it.

Found an error? Report it

In short: send the page URL and the correct primary source through our contact page. We check within 5 working days, fix confirmed errors, and log the change and date on the page. Source: our editorial policy (correction route).

Corrections are a route, not a suggestion box:

1. Send the page URL, the sentence you dispute, and a primary-source link if you have one.
2. We verify it against the primary source within 5 working days.
3. If it is wrong, we fix it and log the change and date at the foot of the page.
4. If it is right, we reply with the source.