BPMR 2008 filed. Risk reduction got stronger as a constraint. No path named.

Status. 4 Sep 2026 · 19:55. Category Evidence.

Headline. Standing job is other recon, not stop. This hour took Risk reduction after Surviving Economic Abuse filled Competitor mapping at 18:55. Preferred Business Protection from Misleading Marketing Regulations 2008 — the B2B misleading-marketing statute left unused when ASA preferred lived at 04:55 — is readable on legislation.gov.uk. I have not named a market. A B2B advertising statute is not a customer. P (company position toward $2.5–5bn) has not moved.

What the agent just did. Rotated away from 18:55 Competitor mapping (Surviving Economic Abuse) into Risk reduction. Preferred BPMR 2008 (S.I. 2008/1276). It lived, so the DMCCA unfair-commercial-practices fallback already filed on 3 Sep was left unused as primary. Recorded the statute and the live Business Companion B2B marketing guide; CMA’s consumer unfair-trading guidance stays context only. No Companies House company number printed on the pages opened — CH not opened. Did not open 16892858. Previous filed hour 18:55 EXISTS — not FAIL. No 15:55 fire — already noted; not FAIL. 14:55 and 08:55 already skipped — not re-asked. 17:15 close is a separate routine — not stolen.

Why this hour. Destination is the $2.5–5bn company → the first-customer cut stays parked (63e813ea) → the live middle gate is still “path candidates still cannot be compiled” (compile 0; reach remains the blocker — how a first professional hour is found and sold) → this moment tests a risk constraint on inventing a first-hour sold by misleading B2B marketing claims without noticing BPMR sits next to ASA/CAP. It does not create a runnable route. BPMR sits on the live gate because inventing a first sold hour that assumes B2B claims are unconstrained is already illegal under the statute; filing it does not invent who pays or how FYJ finds them.

What it does to the live doll gate. Nothing that opens it. Path candidates still cannot be compiled. Compile stays 0. The hour filed another risk-reduction note on Agent View. A B2B misleading-marketing statute does not close the reach blocker. It does sharpen the claim-side of “how the first hour is sold” when the message is trader-facing: misleading advertising to traders is prohibited, comparative ads have conditions, and Trading Standards / the CMA can enforce — including by injunction and, for the offence, criminal penalty. That is a constraint on what a B2B selling message may say, not a named how. It did not compile a candidate and did not install the productised-menu bucket as a path.

Grade. Got stronger (as a constraint on inventing a first-hour sold by misleading B2B marketing claims). Stayed thin as a path. Honesty: it is not a path. Who / why / how / next are still missing.

Latest. The Business Protection from Misleading Marketing Regulations 2008 (S.I. 2008/1276) came into force on 26 May 2008. They prohibit advertising which misleads traders — deception that is likely to affect a trader’s economic behaviour, or that injures a competitor. Comparative advertising is allowed only when set conditions are met. Engaging in misleading advertising under the regulations is a criminal offence, with a fine on summary conviction and, on indictment, a fine or up to two years. Local Trading Standards have a duty to enforce; the CMA may also enforce and can seek injunctions. Business Companion’s live B2B marketing guide (last reviewed April 2025) says the same in plain English and points to DMCCA Part 4 Chapter 1 as the consumer-side equivalent already on the file. Distinct from ASA/CAP self-regulation (04:55) and from the consumer unfair-trading cluster already filed. One line: 63e813ea is live (parked).

Open the file. 4 Sep 19:55 research · Agent View evidence file · BPMR 2008 source

P unchanged. p-evidence.md stays empty so the score cannot be faked. market-paths.md still starts No path named yet.

Cut still parked (63e813ea). The customer cut is a milestone / north star, not the live job. Not unparked this hour. Contract 63e813ea is live (parked).

Walk. Destination ($2.5–5bn) → first-customer gate (parked, 63e813ea) → live gate (path candidates still cannot be compiled; compile 0; blocker still reach) → this route (Risk reduction / BPMR 2008 B2B misleading-marketing statute, stronger as a constraint on inventing misleading B2B sales claims next to ASA/CAP, not a named path) → this hour’s finding (stronger as constraint; stayed thin as a path) → does not name a customer, does not move P, does not unpark the cut.

This page sits under Evidence. It is a dated record. It does not move heading. The working file stays on Agent View. Hermes parked. This hour worked Risk-reduction filing on the live compile-paths gate.

14:55 skipped (no reply by 16:25) — not re-asked. 08:55 already skipped — not re-asked. Previous filed hour 18:55 EXISTS — not FAIL. Previous recon 17:55 / 16:55 / 13:55 / 12:55 / 11:55 EXIST — not FAIL. No 15:55 fire — not FAIL. No 05:55 / 07:55 files — not FAIL. Hours 20:55–00:55 already noted at 01:55 — not FAIL. 17:15 close is a separate routine — not stolen.

Pushback invited — decide or criticise

Working set, not exhaustive. Criticism of this recon — deepen, drop, or change perimeter — not “name a market so the hour has a title”.
1. Is a BPMR 2008 B2B misleading-marketing filing enough risk-reduction context next to ASA/CAP and the already-filed consumer unfair-trading cluster, or should the next hour deepen on a related selling-surface constraint without treating traders or advertisers as a buyer?
2. Should I drop further advertising / marketing-claims / unfair-trading hosts as enough already for FYJ invention-risk — a statute page will never name FYJ’s buyer — and look for a different Risk reduction lane entirely?
3. Next unused preferred if Risk reduction continues: leave DMCCA UCP alone (already filed) — or switch the next hour to Market discovery / Market scenarios / Companies in the space / Competitor mapping (Galop or Respect still unused as competitor primaries)?
4. Is “B2B claims on the selling surface must not mislead traders” still the right perimeter for the live gate — should the next hour test a different blocker shape, or stay on reach / selling-surface constraints without naming a buyer?

Confirmation

Contract UUID 26e4abb6-3b66-4a66-a4f7-d4c065ad9233 is live. Hold = no invention, not no recon. Standing work is recon until end-to-end paths emerge and value-forming is visible. No path named. P unchanged. Customer cut parked.
One line: 63e813ea is live (parked).
e834b2f2 compile still 0; blocker still reach. 58cd58c1 Founder View is the story. 06657cd0 pages shareable. f7c2a04e voice walk. c7b2e14a short Evidence. Hermes parked. Slot unchanged. Layer unchanged (Peer toggle: Founder View ↔ Agent View).
14:55 skipped (no reply by 16:25). Proceeded without new founder input. Previous filed hour 18:55 EXISTS — not FAIL. BPMR 2008 preferred lived; no fallback. No 15:55 fire — noted; not FAIL.