Know what to fix before you pay to fix it.

The audit starts with the business goal and most valuable customer action. I then review the message, trust, usability, customer route, technical health, search visibility and measurement evidence that affect that goal. You receive ranked findings, the evidence behind them and practical next decisions.

No. Automated tools can provide useful evidence for performance, code and search signals, but they do not understand commercial priorities or customer context. I use relevant tools inside a human review and explain which findings matter, which can wait and which should be ignored.

Implementation is separate unless a specific small change is explicitly included in the agreed scope. This keeps the diagnosis clear and lets you choose whether to fix the work yourself, ask me for a quote or use another supplier.

Only when the evidence supports it. The report separates repair, focused improvement, migration and genuine rebuild needs. If the current platform remains owned, maintainable and capable of supporting the customer route, replacing it simply because something newer exists is not a useful recommendation.

An SEO audit concentrates on search visibility and the pages or technical signals that support it. This website audit follows the wider business route from arrival to enquiry, booking or sale, so message, trust, usability, forms, integrations and measurement are reviewed alongside visibility.

It includes relevant performance evidence and identifies whether speed is blocking the customer route. A full speed overhaul with matched before-and-after testing is a separate implementation service. The audit helps decide whether that work deserves priority.

Where it helps the decision, I compare visible offers, page structure, proof and customer expectations in the market. I do not treat copying a competitor as a strategy, and I cannot see their private conversion data or internal systems.

A public-facing review can begin with the website and business context. Analytics, search tools, WordPress, hosting or advertising access may provide stronger evidence when relevant. I explain which access would change the confidence of a finding rather than asking for every account by default.

The timing depends on the website size, customer routes, available access and the decision the report must support. I confirm the scope before starting. A focused service website and a connected ecommerce system should not be presented as the same amount of review.

Yes. I can review WordPress, static HTML, bespoke PHP and connected web systems. The technical evidence changes with the stack, while the customer, business and prioritisation questions remain consistent.

Yes. The report is intended to stand on its own. You can implement it yourself, ask me to quote or use another supplier. Where a finding depends on access or an assumption, that limitation is kept visible so another developer can verify it.

It is a separate £95 to £150 review of recurring website and software costs. I list each subscription, the job it performs, overlap, lock-in and ownership, then recommend keep, replace or cancel with payback maths. The fee is credited against a later build if you choose one.