Verify a decision

{"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-08-25T09:05:51.246Z","decision":"review_revise","investigation_id":"4363d267-d270-468c-a37f-ca36b140d556","new_score":32,"page_slug":"changenow","prev_score":42,"reason":"The mechanical disputed_pct (2 of 46 claims, 4.3%) sits in the approve band, and the page's central factual narrative — ChangeNOW's appearance in the Gravity Bridge and Coinsbuy hack fund flows, the dollar figures, dates, and routing details — is solidly confirmed against The Block, CoinTelegraph, CryptoTimes, and TechTimes (claim_findings 0-5, 20-29). However, the page's regulatory-status claim that 'no confirmed regulatory enforcement action by any government body... including any EU or UK regulator' has been taken against ChangeNOW is materially incomplete: a Tier 1 source shows the UK FCA has listed ChangeNOW on its public unauthorised-firms warning list since November 2024, telling consumers to avoid dealing with the firm (claim_findings[6] and claim_findings[39], both surfaced again as coverage_gaps[0] with priority 'high'). That distinction — no fine versus no regulator action at all — is exactly the kind of thing a reader assessing exchange risk would want to know, and the page states the broader, now-inaccurate version. Separately, claim_findings[32] found the page misattributes Romanian law-enforcement involvement to the wrong 2020 recovery case (a fake-Uniswap-app phishing incident), conflating it with an unrelated seed-phrase-theft case that actually involved Romanian authorities — a real sourcing error, though one of case-attribution rather than fabricated outcome. A second high-priority coverage gap (coverage_gaps[1]) further notes the asset-recovery section leans almost entirely on ChangeNOW's own promotional materials and omits independent Trustpilot complaints about extended fund freezes. Individually these findings were classified in ways (partially_supported, disputed-but-narrow) that keep the aggregate metric low, but taken together they show a consistent pattern of the page presenting ChangeNOW's regulatory and compliance standing more favorably than the fuller record supports. That pattern, combined with two high-priority coverage gaps, is enough to warrant revision even though disputed_pct alone would suggest approval outright.","score_delta":-10,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}