Your article (Save you evaluate branded ‘superficial’ as previous choices lost sight of, 16 September) was once based on a false impression of the phrases of reference of my impartial evaluate of Save you.
As I’ve made very transparent, it’s an evidence-based evaluate with not anything off the desk. To be able to meet that requirement, I shall read about as a lot lived enjoy of Save you as will likely be described to me. On this evaluate, as in all others, the previous will tell the longer term. What I can no longer be doing is passing judgment on particular previous instances, nor on previous insurance policies changed within the years since Save you was once first devised.
I am hoping that the responses to my name for proof (quickly to be issued) will come with actual examples of the total vary of enjoy and follow of Save you.
Unbiased reviewer of Save you