Skip to content
Source LedgerSUPPLIERS.WIKIEvidence checklist ↗
Menu +

When a supplier website looks current but its claims are old

A modern website design can carry a decade-old certificate image or product page. Visual freshness is not an evidence date.

What the primary source can establish

The U.S. International Trade Administration due diligence guide is the first-party reference for this guide. The guide separates country, company or partner, and purchasing risks and calls for continuing due diligence. It does not investigate or endorse any named supplier on Source Ledger. The steps below are our editorial method for making a buyer-facing field more precise.

A field-level check

Check the date or revision on the underlying document, not the site's appearance. Use the original issuer or register for status fields. Ask the supplier for a current specification when the web page lacks a version.

Write down the exact field, the party that supplied the information, the original document or page, the date seen and the scope of the check. If a reviewer took an action, record that action rather than a general “verified” label. Reopen the source when the transaction or underlying document changes.

Where the inference stops

A copyright year in the footer does not date every claim on the site. Equally, an old page can still contain useful history if clearly labelled.

A missing answer is a question to resolve, not permission to substitute a guess. Separate a statement by the supplier from a public record and from a documented human review. No source in this article proves a quality ranking or an existing buyer relationship.

What to record before deciding

Use dated, attributed language for website claims and flag undated high-impact fields for follow-up. Do not infer current stock or certification from site polish.

This entry describes how to evaluate evidence. It is not a dossier for a real company, an approval decision or a substitute for transaction-specific professional review.

Common question

Does a freshly redesigned site make its product claims current?

No. Each consequential claim needs its own version and source check.

Related guide

Continue with How to handle conflicting sources in a supplier profile for another field-level check.