Product focus, schedule & Rob.

Notes from today's working session — captured here for Pablo and the wider team to read through before we sit down and agree where we go from here. Bullets are paraphrased from the conversation; flag anything that misrepresents what was said. Headline. Rob's input was an opinion, not a ruling. He raised a question on the regulatory stance of our ACT-side products and offered a view that the passive Sorted-side products are likely safer and could well be a better place to start — he is not ruling ACT out, he is flagging that we need to understand the regulatory aspects better and should get proper sign-off before heavy product development on the higher-risk lines. Married to that, his strong instinct from the Judge Rinder bench is that intent to create legal relations is the backdrop to a huge number of low-level consumer disputes — a freemium opportunity worth taking seriously, with the volume question still open. High confidence in the overall plan and structure. Mock-up contracts for builders / self-employed remain a strong candidate. Ideal Rob-led launch window: September / early October 2026.

1Rob's input — opinion, not edict

Rob offered two views that have informed our thinking on the opening slate. Both are opinions and instincts from his vantage point, not regulatory rulings — Rob does not pretend to be an expert on the regulatory questions and was explicit that we should take proper advice. Captured here so they feed into the next round of product research, not as a settled position.

• Point 1 — A question on regulatory framingRob raised a question about the regulatory stance of our ACT-side products (intent / litigation-related): instinctively they sell closer to the wind from an SRA standpoint, and county court defence in particular he flags as the kind of thing the SRA is more likely to scrutinise. He is not claiming hard knowledge of where the specific thresholds sit, and he is not ruling these products out — he is presenting an opinion that the passive Sorted-side products are likely safer and could well be a better place to start. The actionable steer: we need to understand the regulatory aspects better, and should secure proper regulatory sign-off before heavy product development on the higher-risk lines. Regulatory work informs the order in which we launch — it does not, on Rob's view, decide which products we ultimately build.
• Point 2 — Commercial opportunity (with a volume question)Rob sees a real opportunity in the free and freemium products on the Sorted side. Specifically: proper contracts, loan agreements, and a tool for builders to record the adjusting terms of their agreements so the legal contract retains specificity as work evolves. His strong instinct from the Judge Rinder bench: intent to create legal relations is the backdrop to almost every low-level consumer-style commercial dispute — and he sees a huge opportunity in solving and assisting with that issue.
  • Ed's challenge. Is that representative of a huge volume of disputes in the real world, or are those simply the more interesting disputes to put in front of a TV judge? Rob didn't know — he didn't get to see what the producers had researched and filtered before a case landed on the bench. His view remains a strong instinct, not a quantified claim. Worth validating with proper market research before we size the opportunity.

2Fletchers contract — renewal 25 June

The existing Fletchers arrangement comes up for renewal on 25 June. Review terms before we sign or extend.

• ActionPull the existing Fletchers contract and read it end-to-end before 25 June.
• FocusCheck the non-compete clauses specifically — what they restrict, for how long, and across which product areas. We need to know whether the renewal locks us out of any of the product lines listed in section 6.
• Note any other terms that materially affect our route to market (exclusivity, IP, data, referral economics).

3Rob's time commitment

• Open question — is the working assumption 2 days per week for Rob, or closer to a full week?
• Needs confirming before we publish the launch schedule and before any partnership document is finalised — both depend on his available capacity through Sept / Oct.

4Schedule & marketing

The launch window has to sit around Rob's external commitments. Sketch as it stands:

• JuneRob's new book launches — one TV show tied to it.
• End Aug / early SeptRob & Rylan project lands.
• Ideal launch windowRob-led Legalhelp launch is best placed in September / early October, after the Rylan beat and before the autumn news cycle thins out.

5What "membership" actually means

Two working definitions on the table — both worth keeping live until we test them.

• Definition A — StorageMembership = keeping your data and your documents on-site with us. The value is the persistent vault, not the per-document fee.
• Definition B — SubscriptionMonthly subscription for repeat users — e.g. a builder using the service every month to mock up new contracts. The value is the steady-cadence usage, not a one-off purchase.
• These are not mutually exclusive — most likely the membership tier bundles both. Worth pricing each lever separately so we can see what the customer is actually paying for.

6SRA & compliance framing

Regulatory care has to be visible on every customer surface. Restating the rule:

• SRA must be in the forefront of how we think about every product decision and every line of copy.
• Clear, unmistakable clauses on the site stating Legalhelp is not a law firm.
• Position the product as a self-help tool throughout — not a legal service, not advice, not representation.

7Products to focus on — working hypothesis

Initial product line-up discussed for the September / October window. One clear primary; four supporting. Treat this as a working hypothesis — Section 1's reframing means this list will be revisited in the Section 9 process.

8High-volume topics from Rob's audience

Topics Rob flagged as consistently high-volume from the Judge Rinder show and the Sun column. Not for the launch slate — useful as a roadmap of where customer pull already exists.

• SENDSpecial educational needs & disability — children in schools.
• ParkingParking charges and PCN disputes.
• NeighboursNeighbour disputes.
• PlanningPlanning disputes.
• UtilitiesUtility overcharges.
• ReviewsBad reviews left against companies (and the legal exposure that follows).

9Next exercise — converging on the opening slate

Section 1's reframing means the Section 7 line-up is now a working hypothesis, not a decision. The structured process to get from hypothesis to locked opening slate, with the work-back from the September / early October launch.

• Step 1 — LonglistBuild a candidate-product longlist covering both motions on the product map (intent / ACT and avoidance / Sorted). Weight to Sorted-side passive products — proper contracts, loan agreements, builder agreement-evolution tool, promissory notes, basic sale agreements, wills, simple deeds. Pull from the existing product suite index, Rob's high-volume audience signals (Section 8), and the casual-contracts thread.
• Step 2 — Score each candidateFour axes:
  • Regulatory exposure — where each candidate sits on the SRA risk band. Score low / medium / high. Rob's instinct is one input; proper regulatory advice on any candidate in the medium / high band is required before lock.
  • Customer pull — where the demand signal already exists (Rob's audience, search volume, Trustpilot adjacency).
  • Build complexity — can it ship in self-help framing with no senior-practitioner review tail?
  • Partnership lockout — overlap with Fletchers non-compete (Section 2 dependency).
• Step 3 — Research sessionHalf-day working session — Ed, Rob, Jemima, Rachel, Pablo. Walk the scored longlist, converge on an opening slate of 3–5 products. Document the rationale for each include / exclude so we can defend it.
• Step 4 — Lock the slateWork back from the launch window: end-August launch-ready means slate locked by mid-June. Slate becomes the Phase 1 wedge replacement on [[goals-and-strategy]]. Anything not in the slate is parked, not killed.
• Step 5 — Slot into buildEach product in the slate goes through the standard 7-step build process ([[product-process]]) with the readiness cohort gates ([[product-readiness-testing]]).