A structured checklist grouped by what each question is actually testing, and what a good answer sounds like when you hear one.
Due diligence on a lead supplier is usually a phone call and a gut feeling. It should be a short list of written questions, because the answers are exactly what you will need if the supply does not behave as described.
Two reasons. The first is memory: a call six weeks ago is not a record. The second is legal weight. The Fair Trading Act 1986 prohibits misleading and deceptive conduct and unsubstantiated representations, and requires a trader to hold reasonable grounds for a claim at the time the claim is made. Trader intent is irrelevant.
A written answer is a representation. A verbal one is a conversation two people remember differently.
The single most revealing question: The live URL. An owned-brand operator sends it in the same reply. One buying network traffic frequently cannot, and that answer tells you more about the product than the rest of the list combined.
| Ask | What good looks like |
|---|---|
| What is your written definition of an invalid record? | Specific and testable, agreed before supply |
| How is a replacement claimed and how fast is it resolved? | Per record, stated turnaround, no quota |
| Is there a cap on replacements? | No cap |
| How long is the claim window? | Long enough for a full six-attempt cadence |
| Credit or refund? | My choice, not credit only |
| What is the minimum commitment and notice period? | Short enough to leave if it does not work |
The claim window is the term brokers most often overlook. A 48 hour window expires before a fortnight-long contact cadence has finished, which means the policy cannot be used for the failures that only surface late.
These matter because your own obligations do not transfer. Under IPP 3A you must take reasonable steps to make a person aware you hold information collected from a source other than them, and that is far easier when the supplier's form already disclosed it.
A supplier who answers everything in one exchange, with facts rather than adjectives, is describing an operation they understand. One who returns a round of reassuring language and a round of "let me check" is describing something else.
How Lead Foundry answers this: The entity is QuoteHub Limited, NZBN 9429053430991, checkable on the public register. Enquiries come from QuoteHub, which we own, verification is an SMS code inside the form flow, each enquiry goes to one broker with no expiry, and you set the invalidity criteria before supply starts.
Group the questions by what they test: the legal entity and where to verify it, the source of the enquiries and whether you can see the live page, the product including verification and exclusivity terms, the commercial terms including the written definition of an invalid record, and the consumer position covering consent, retention and access requests.
Yes. A written answer is a representation, and under the Fair Trading Act 1986 a trader must hold reasonable grounds for a claim at the time it is made, with intent being irrelevant. A verbal answer six weeks ago is a conversation two people remember differently.
Long enough to complete a full six-attempt contact cadence, which runs about a fortnight. A 48 hour window expires before you can know whether a record was any good, which means the policy cannot cover the failures that only surface after several attempts.
What consent exists and whether it names onward supply to a broker, the retention period and the purpose it is tied to, what happens to records after any exclusivity period ends, and how a consumer access or deletion request is handled and routed to you. Your IPP 3A obligations do not transfer, so the supplier's form wording directly affects your position.