We welcome corrections, questions about the material published here, and suggestions for items or topics we have not covered. If you find something on this site that is wrong or out of date, please tell us — we would rather fix it than defend it.
Email us at [email protected], or use the form below, which simply opens a pre-addressed message in your own email program. Nothing you type is transmitted to or stored by this website.
Editorial corrections
If you are writing about a factual error, please include the page URL and, where you can, the source that supports the correction — a contract clause, a statute, a regulator's page, or a standard of practice. Corrections supported by a primary source get handled fastest, and we credit nobody and blame nobody; we just fix it.
Questions we can usefully answer
We are glad to hear from readers about the material itself. Questions that we can actually do something with include: a page that contradicts a source you have, a contract mechanism we have described unclearly, a state-law variation we have missed, a specialty inspection or excluded item that deserves its own page, or a passage that reads as advice when it should read as explanation.
We also welcome correspondence from home inspectors, adjusters, contractors and attorneys who see these disputes from the inside. Practitioner detail about how a particular exclusion plays out in the field is exactly the material that is hardest to source from public documents, and it improves these pages more than anything else does.
Questions we cannot answer
To be direct about the limits, so nobody wastes time writing in: we cannot tell you whether your specific claim should have been paid, review your contract and give you an opinion on it, recommend a warranty company or an inspector, tell you whether to buy a particular plan, intervene with any provider on your behalf, or give you legal, insurance or financial advice of any kind. Those questions belong to a licensed professional in your state, and in a claim dispute, to your state's insurance department or the agency that regulates service contracts where you live.
Press and research
Journalists, researchers and attorneys are welcome to cite this material, quote from it with attribution, and link to it. The machine-readable entity map published at the site root sets out the site's key concepts with source passages attached, which makes it straightforward to check what a given page is asserting and where it came from.
If you are working on a story or a matter and need to understand a mechanism described here in more depth, say so in your message and we will point you to the underlying primary sources rather than to our own pages.
Suggesting a new page
The coverage profiles on this site were selected because they are the items buyers search for and argue about most, but the list is not fixed. If there is a component, an excluded condition, a specialty inspection or a contract mechanism that recurs in your experience and is not covered here, tell us what it is and why it matters. The most useful suggestions come with the shape of the problem attached — which clause causes the dispute, which trade resolves it, which deadline governs it.
The same applies to the guides. If a subject is badly served everywhere you have looked, that is usually a sign it is worth writing about properly, and it is exactly the kind of gap this site exists to fill.
Response times
This is a reference project rather than a business, so replies are not instant. Corrections that come with a source are prioritised because they can be verified and applied quickly. General questions about the material get answered as time allows. Requests that fall into the categories above — claim reviews, contract opinions, provider recommendations — will not receive a substantive reply, because answering them would amount to giving advice we are not in a position to give.