Remove service claims the store no longer operates

Read the activity claimed beside each vendor name

Capture the policy URL, published version and exact sentence that names the service. Identify the activity described: collecting form submissions, sending email, analyzing visits, processing payments, hosting records or supplying another feature. A vendor name can be correct while the described activity is stale, and the activity can continue under a replacement vendor even when the old name is wrong.

Include generic feature statements that depend on a service, such as an account or newsletter function, where they belong to the same change. Keep the review limited to the affected service claims. This is a reconciliation after an operational change, not a determination of every privacy obligation or every retention setting in the business.

Look beyond the public page for current use

Ask each service's operational owner for dated evidence of its actual role: current integration settings, an approved service inventory, relevant account configuration, a change record or a termination confirmation. Where authorized records exist, compare recent activity with the configuration. An installed integration without activity and a recent invoice without a documented purpose both need explanation; neither alone fully describes the current operation.

Treat browser observations as evidence about the pages and states observed. The absence of a visible widget does not answer whether a server integration, administrative workflow or historical account still uses that service. Likewise, removing a plugin does not itself document what happened to data previously held by the vendor. Keep those questions with the people who control the integration and account.

Record the cutover date and distinguish current collection from remaining historical responsibilities. A retired provider may still be named in records for prior orders, support or account administration; establish whether that is true here before deciding what the policy should say. Do not delete the service's name simply because a new provider now handles new activity.

Classify the mismatch before rewriting it

For an active service, compare the current purpose with the policy's description and mark specific discrepancies. For a retired service with remaining responsibilities, describe those verified facts for the policy owner to assess. For a fully retired service, retain the evidence for the end date and completed responsibilities. If an account owner or record is missing, leave the classification unresolved rather than presenting uncertainty as a completed deletion.

Keep factual corrections distinct from legal conclusions. The operational owner can establish which integration runs and when it changed; the policy owner and qualified adviser determine the wording, applicable duties and whether any communication or consent action is needed. Do not infer that a vendor removal permits erasing old records, ends an existing promise or makes an earlier policy inaccurate for its own period.

The FTC's truth-in-advertising guidance supports truthful, substantiated public claims generally. It does not supply a jurisdiction-specific privacy rule, mandate a vendor-list format or establish that replacing a name is legally sufficient. The useful output here is a documented mismatch and a responsible correction path, not a compliance finding.

Publish the approved correction against the real change

Give the policy owner a compact change record: original sentence, verified operational facts, proposed revision or removal, affected URLs and the evidence owner. If a replacement vendor or renamed feature needs to be described, verify that relationship before inserting new copy. Preserve the prior published version with its actual dates so the business can identify what accompanied earlier orders or inquiries.

After an authorized revision, inspect the affected public policy and the links or copied passages that were included in the change scope. Record the publication date separately from the service's cutover date. A revised date on the policy is not evidence that the integration was retired on that day. Close the finding when the approved wording is public and matches the verified operation; keep any unverified residual use open.

Prism's published website review can examine store policies, marketing claims and business disclosures together within an agreed scope. For a consultation, bring the affected URLs, the service change and a non-sensitive summary of the discrepancy. Confirm reporting, responsibilities, fees and terms before work. Findings are informational and do not certify the policy or decide a provider's underwriting.

Service-list reconciliation

Complete one copy for each named service or dependent feature affected by the change. A removal is ready for the policy owner's decision only when current activity and remaining responsibilities have been investigated. Use internal evidence references, not personal records or access credentials.

Worksheet entries are not submitted by Prism’s worksheet and are not saved by the site. Use record types, availability, anonymized observations, or match/mismatch results. Do not enter government identifiers, customer names or addresses, customer messages, receipt-access links, card or bank details, passwords, or keys. Send sensitive documents only through the provider’s verified secure channel.

These are temporary notes. Leaving or reloading this page may clear them. Worksheet entries are not sent automatically. If you copy notes into the consultation message and submit the form, Prism receives them as part of your request.