The short answer
A fair policy replaces disconnected numbers, provably false contact details and bounced emails on proof, without argument and without a quota. It does not replace merchants who declined, did not answer, or turned out not to want funding after all — those are dialling outcomes. The dodge to watch for is a policy with a percentage cap, a short claim window, or a requirement to prove a negative.
Replacement policy is where a vendor’s confidence in their own product becomes contractual. The generous ones are usually generous because the claim rate is low, which is itself the useful signal.
| Claim | Should be replaced? |
|---|---|
| Number disconnected or not in service | Yes |
| Email hard-bounces | Yes |
| Contact details provably false | Yes |
| Duplicate of a lead already delivered | Yes |
| Outside the agreed qualification criteria | Yes |
| Merchant did not answer three calls | No |
| Merchant said they are not interested | No |
| Merchant was declined by a funder | No |
| Merchant funded elsewhere first | No |
The terms that make a policy decorative
- A cap expressed as a percentage of the order. If 5% is the ceiling, the sixth bad lead in a hundred is yours.
- A 48-hour claim window, which is shorter than the cadence you should be running.
- A requirement to submit call recordings for each claim, which prices the claim above the lead.
- Credits toward a future order rather than replacements on this one.
- Sole discretion language, which converts the policy into a request.
What we do
On exclusive leads, spam, dead numbers and bounced emails are replaced on proof, with no cap and no argument, and anything failing the qualification criteria is never sent in the first place so it cannot be billed. A short order is refunded for the difference rather than credited. Those are narrow terms, which is the point — a policy you can rely on beats one that sounds larger.