Skip to main content

Security report for royalclaims.co.uk

Royal Claims · Transportation · United Kingdom

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in Email security, SSL/TLS and 2 other checks.

Security score

58/100

Risk levelMedium

0–100, higher is better. How it is calculated

Royal Claims is a Birmingham-based claims management company specializing in personal injury, road traffic accidents, workplace injuries, housing disrepair, and medical negligence claims. Established in 2007, the company operates on a No Win, No Fee basis and is FCA regulated, providing trusted legal assistance and replacement vehicles to non-fault claimants. The website reflects a professional business with clear service offerings and a focus on the UK market. Technically, the site is built on WordPress using Elementor and Astra theme, with good SEO and mobile optimization. Security posture is adequate with HTTPS enabled, though some security headers are not explicitly detected. Privacy compliance is partial, with a cookie consent mechanism present but no explicit privacy or terms of service pages found. The WHOIS data for the domain is unavailable due to a naming rules violation, which raises some concerns about domain legitimacy and registration consistency. Overall, the website presents a credible business but would benefit from improved transparency in domain registration and privacy documentation.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
68/ 100 · Medium
Checks completed
7of 7

NIS2 Art. 21(2)

  1. (a) Risk analysis and security policies: Not visible from outside
  2. (b) Incident handling: One indicator
  3. (c) Business continuity, backups and crisis management: Not visible from outside
  4. (d) Supply chain security: Not visible from outside
  5. (e) Secure acquisition, development and maintenance, including vulnerability handling: Partly checked
  6. (f) Assessing the effectiveness of security measures: Not visible from outside
  7. (g) Cyber hygiene and security training: Not visible from outside
  8. (h) Cryptography and encryption: Partly checked
  9. (i) HR security, access control and asset management: One indicator
  10. (j) Multi-factor authentication and secured communications: Not visible from outside

This scan rated NIS2 with an earlier keyword method that is no longer shown; rescan for the per-article view. Risk management, continuity, supply chain, training, MFA, management oversight (Art. 20) and incident reporting (Art. 23) need internal evidence, and Guard cannot tell whether NIS2 applies to this organisation.

GDPR is indicative only, based on publicly visible signals: Articles 7, 12, 13 and 32 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Article 5(3) of the ePrivacy Directive. Not a certification or legal assessment.

Priority findings

6 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. Email security

    SPF, DKIM and DMARC stop others sending email that looks like it comes from your domain, a common route to phishing and invoice fraud.

    • High

      No SPF record found

      SPF helps prevent email spoofing

      What to do: Add SPF record: "v=spf1 include:_spf.yourmailprovider.com ~all"

  2. SSL/TLS

    TLS encrypts the connection and proves the site is really yours. Weak or expiring certificates trigger browser warnings and put traffic at risk.

    • High

      Weak Protocols Supported

      Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

      What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions

      • CWE-327
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V12.1.1
    • High

      Weak SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

  3. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • High

      No Cookie Policy found

      GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage

      What to do: Add a dedicated cookie policy explaining cookie usage and purposes

  4. Security headers

    Security headers are instructions your web server sends to every visitor’s browser. Missing ones leave visitors more exposed to attacks such as clickjacking and injected scripts.

    • High

      Missing Strict-Transport-Security header

      Forces HTTPS connections

      What to do: Add "Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains; preload"

      • CWE-319
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V3.4.1

Need hands-on remediation? Email guard@offseq.com

Keep watching royalclaims.co.uk

This scan found 28 issues across 6 checks. Monitoring re-runs those checks daily, emails you when something material changes and records each fix, so you can show progress.

Daily monitoring

Recommended

€25per month

  • TLS certificates and expiry
  • DNS records
  • SPF, DKIM and DMARC
  • Security headers
  • GDPR and NIS2 posture
  • Exposed services
  • Third-party trackers
  • Security score drift

Email alerts on material changes and an exportable JSON history of every change.

Billed monthly to your card. Cancel anytime. The full timeline opens with your unlock code.

Full report

€39.90one-time

  • The complete analysis as a PDF you can cite
  • Email delivery with an unlock code
  • Lifetime access to this report

Prices incl. 21% VAT. Secure checkout by Mollie; sold by SEQ SIA, Latvia.

Results by check

Each check with its score, findings and the evidence it collected.

How this score is calculated

The security score runs 0–100, higher is better. It is the plain average of the security checks that completed in this scan, each counted equally. A check that could not run is left out: it counts neither as a pass nor as a fail.

Counted in this score

SSL/TLS
37
Security headers
40
Email security
35
DNS health
65
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
68
Average
58

Not counted

  • NIS2 outside view: Re-weights evidence from the TLS, email, DNS, network and hygiene checks, so counting it would count that evidence twice. Shown on its own.
  • OffSeq Observations: An AI reading of the site, useful context but not reproducible evidence. Shown on its own.

Findings that cap the score at 49

Each of these is serious on its own, so while any is present the site cannot rate better than high risk, however good the other checks are.

  • The certificate is not trusted by browsers
  • The website is not served over HTTPS
  • A database, remote desktop, file-sharing or Telnet service is reachable from the internet
  • The page loads a script from a compromised source
  • The domain registration has expired
  • SPF authorises every server to send mail as the domain

Partial scans

When the site blocks Guard or most checks cannot run, the score covers only the checks that ran (usually DNS and email), is capped at 75 and is shown as partial, without a risk level.

Risk levels

  • Critical0–25
  • High26–49
  • Medium50–75
  • Low76–100

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

Royal Claims targets individuals in Birmingham and across the UK who need assistance with personal injury and accident claims. Their business model leverages a panel of expert solicitors working on a No Win, No Fee basis, appealing to clients seeking low-risk legal support. The company also differentiates itself by providing replacement licensed taxis and private hire vehicles, a service recognized by thousands of drivers. The market positioning is strong within the local legal claims sector, supported by FCA regulation and social proof via Facebook. The company appears to be small-sized, focusing on specialized legal and transportation-related claims. The website's content and branding are consistent and professional, supporting trust and client engagement. However, the lack of detailed WHOIS data and privacy policies may impact perceived credibility among more security-conscious clients.

Security posture

The website employs HTTPS, ensuring encrypted communication, and uses modern web technologies such as WordPress and Elementor. While no explicit security headers like Content-Security-Policy or X-Frame-Options were detected, there is no evidence of exposed sensitive data or vulnerable libraries. The cookie consent mechanism indicates some level of privacy awareness. However, the absence of a privacy policy and terms of service pages is a compliance gap. The WHOIS failure and domain registration anomaly introduce uncertainty about domain legitimacy, which could be a risk factor. Overall, the security posture is moderate but could be enhanced by implementing additional HTTP security headers, regular vulnerability assessments, and improved privacy documentation.

Recommendations

  1. Implement and publish a comprehensive privacy policy and terms of service to improve compliance and user trust.
  2. Add and configure HTTP security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  3. Investigate and resolve domain registration inconsistencies to ensure domain legitimacy and improve trustworthiness.
  4. Conduct regular security audits and update all CMS components and plugins to mitigate vulnerabilities.
  5. Enhance transparency by providing data retention policies and GDPR compliance statements.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
Royal Claims
Description
Royal Claims is a trusted claims management company in Birmingham, specialising in personal injury claims, road traffic accident (RTA) claims, workplace injuries, housing disrepair, and medical negligence cases. They operate on a No Win, No Fee basis and provide replacement licensed taxis and private hire vehicles to non-fault claimants.
Key services
Personal injury claims, Road traffic accident claims, Workplace injury claims, Housing disrepair claims, Medical negligence claims, Replacement licensed taxis and private hire vehicles
Content quality
good
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Elementor, PHP, Google Fonts, jQuery, Rank Math SEO
Frameworks
Astra Theme, Elementor Page Builder
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
basic
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
80/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • No visible exposed sensitive data
  • No vulnerable libraries detected

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics, Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Marketing tools
Rank Math SEO, Google Site Kit
Transparency
basic

Site quality

Design
good
User experience
good
Content relevance
good
Navigation
good
Professionalism
good
Trustworthiness
high

Key observations

  1. Website is accessible with full content
  2. No WAF or security challenge detected
  3. WHOIS data unavailable due to domain naming rules violation
  4. Website uses WordPress with Elementor and Astra theme
  5. FCA regulated claims management company
  6. No explicit privacy or terms of service pages found
  7. Cookie consent banner present and active
  8. Contact information clearly displayed including phone and email
  9. Social media presence limited to Facebook
  10. Good SEO and metadata implementation
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a WordPress CMS platform using the Astra theme and Elementor page builder, indicating a modern and flexible technical infrastructure. It integrates Google Fonts and jQuery libraries, and uses Rank Math SEO for search engine optimization. The site loads with moderate performance and is mobile optimized with responsive design. Accessibility features are basic but present. The use of Google Analytics and Tag Manager indicates moderate user tracking for analytics purposes. No hosting provider details were identified from the content. The technical stack is standard for small to medium-sized business websites, with opportunities for performance tuning and enhanced security configurations.
Standards and sources

Reference chips under each finding point to the standard, regulation or specification the finding relates to. They are taken from the official datasets below and mapped conservatively: a finding with no defensible link shows none. NIS2 and GDPR references mark where a finding is relevant evidence, not a compliance verdict. Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690 binds digital infrastructure and digital service providers; for other entities it is the most detailed public reading of the Article 21 measures. WCAG, EN 301 549, European Accessibility Act and Web Accessibility Directive references name the requirement an automated accessibility rule relates to; they are not a conformance verdict.

Retrieved 2026-10-25

Reviews of this site

Share your experience with royalclaims.co.uk. Every review is verified by email and published after moderation.

Overall rating
Select a rating
4000 characters remaining

We’ll email you to confirm your review and keep your details private.

Community rating

No published reviews yet. Be the first to review royalclaims.co.uk.

Feedback on this report

Rate this report, add an optional comment, and tell us if you want a security specialist to follow up.

Overall report quality
Select a rating
2000 characters remaining

We only use your feedback to improve Guard reports. Contact details are never shared.