Accuracy is not negotiable
One hallucinated citation in a demo ends the conversation and the reference. Buyers need to see controls, not confidence.
Legaltech
Legaltech websites built for people paid to be sceptical.
Judged on: is the output accurate, and is privilege safe?
Lawyers read carefully, bill by the hour and hate being sold to. Your site has to prove the product saves time, keeps privilege intact and won't invent case law. We help you say that precisely.
Who's reading your website
Managing partner
Realisation, utilisation and client value
Practising lawyer
Time saved on work they actually do
Innovation or KM lead
Rollout effort, training and adoption
IT + risk
Confidentiality, privilege, retention and hosting
The problem
Why legaltech websites are hard
Hourly billing cuts both ways
Saving time can look like losing revenue. The value story has to work for the partner, not just the associate.
Privilege and confidentiality
Where documents sit, who can see them and what is used for training are deal-breaking questions.
Slow, consensus-driven buying
Committees, pilots and champions who change firms. The site has to keep selling between meetings.
What a partner is thinking
Four objections, in the order they arrive
Lawyers are trained to find the flaw. Answer these on the page and the pilot conversation starts from a much better place.
“Does it invent things?”
Your pageSay what is cited, what is verified and what a human must check. Show a real output with sources.
“Is client data safe?”
Your pageHosting region, retention, access control and an explicit no-training commitment.
“If it saves time, do we bill less?”
Your pageFrame it as capacity and realisation: more matters, less unbilled review, better fixed-fee margins.
“Who has actually used it?”
Your pageNamed firms, or firm size and practice area, with hours saved and what was reviewed.
The fix
What your website has to do
Legaltech example pageHomepage or key page mockup, 1000×1200
Show the work product
A redlined clause, a drafted memo, a reviewed set. Real output in the lawyer's own format is the strongest proof you have.
Be exact about accuracy and review
Say what is cited, what is verified, what a human must check. Precision reads as competence here.
Answer the privilege question on its own page
Hosting, retention, access, training policy and deletion, in language risk teams can forward.
Arm the internal champion
A one-pager, a pilot plan and an ROI outline they can take to the partners without redrawing it themselves.
Proof
Trust signals buyers look for
Put these where buyers make decisions: near CTAs, on pricing and in the footer. Not buried on an About page.
- Confidentiality and data retention policy
- No-training-on-client-data commitment
- Citation and verification approach
- Named firms or firm size and practice area
- Pilot and rollout plan
- SOC 2, ISO 27001 and hosting region
94%
of buying groups rank their preferred vendors before first contact with sales.
If your website doesn't make the shortlist, sales never gets a shot.
Where to start
Pages we'd build first
A typical starting sitemap for legaltech companies. We adjust it after the audit.
Homepage
Task, output, controls
Solutions by practice
Corporate, litigation, in-house
Security + confidentiality
Privilege answered properly
Accuracy + methodology
How outputs are checked
Case studies
Hours saved, work reviewed
Pilot page
What a 30-day trial looks like
Should we mention AI at all?
Say what it does and what it doesn't. In this market, naming the limits and the review step builds more trust than hiding the mechanism.
How do we sell time savings to an hourly firm?
Frame it as capacity and realisation: more matters handled, less unbilled review, better fixed-fee margins.
Do we need a pilot page?
If your deals start with pilots, yes. Writing down scope, duration and success criteria shortens the negotiation.
Let's fix your legaltech site.
Send your URL. We'll review it against what buyers in your industry look for, and send the top fixes free.