1. Preserve the original question
Before searching, record what the reader actually encountered: the spelling of the brand, the exact domain, the country claimed, the contact details used and the date. Small differences matter. A cloned site may use the name of a real firm while changing the domain, phone number or email address.
If the only input is a generic name, the first task is not to “verify” it. The first task is to establish which entity, if any, the name refers to.
2. Separate brand, domain and legal entity
A trading name is not automatically a company name, and a company name is not automatically proof of control over a domain. We therefore maintain separate notes for the visible brand, the website address, the legal entity claimed on the site and any registration or authorisation number.
Only after those identifiers are collected do we compare whether the records appear to point to the same entity.
3. Use primary sources before summaries
For Irish financial-service claims, the Central Bank of Ireland registers and warning notices are primary reference points. For Irish company identity, the CRO is a primary source. Consumer guidance from CCPC, An Garda Síochána and Citizens Information helps explain practical warning signs and next steps.
A blog post or search-engine snippet may suggest where to look, but it should not replace the record itself.
4. Read the scope of a record
A record answers a particular question. A CRO entry can show that a company exists in the register; it does not, by itself, show that the company is authorised to provide every financial service. Likewise, a regulator entry should be read for the exact entity, permissions and identifiers shown.
We therefore avoid collapsing “registered”, “authorised”, “official website” and “safe” into one label.
5. Compare dates, addresses and contact details
Names can match while the surrounding details do not. We compare the date of a public record with the date a domain or claim appeared, and compare addresses, phone numbers, email domains and company numbers where they are available.
A mismatch is recorded as a mismatch. It is not silently explained away, and it is not automatically treated as proof of wrongdoing.
6. Record negative searches carefully
Not finding a record can be important, but the wording matters. A search may fail because the spelling is different, the entity is registered elsewhere, the relevant register is not the right one, or the information has not yet been published.
The correct wording is usually “not confirmed in the sources checked” rather than “does not exist”.
7. Keep a short evidence log
For an important decision, note the source URL, the organisation that publishes it, the date accessed, the name searched and the relevant result. Screenshots can help preserve context, but a direct URL and the date are more useful for repeating the check later.
This makes the research auditable: another person can see what was checked without having to accept our interpretation on trust.
8. Stop before the evidence becomes a recommendation
Cronaca Faro can explain what a record says and what remains uncertain. It does not decide whether a reader should invest, deposit money, sign a contract or continue a commercial relationship.
When the consequences are material, the next step may be to contact the relevant regulator, bank, consumer body or qualified adviser rather than to search for another opinion page.