Observed 9 September 2026. Public institutional records and scoped visual inspection of the original 2024 company accounts. This packet establishes operational custody and several corporate disclosure boundaries. It does not establish donor instructions, a network-specific budget or exercised control over a particular policy recommendation.
Who maintains the network
The [Online Safety Network privacy notice](http[local research file] says the network has no formal membership or association. Reset Tech operates its website, newsletter and shared email inbox. This is an explicit operational relationship, stronger than inferred affiliation. The notice covers network activity and identifies a federation of Reset legal entities, including Reset Tech UK Limited. It describes them as a single organization for the notice's purposes, with shared staff and systems. That wording is not a legal merger, a corporate ownership tree or proof that the UK company alone contracts for every network expense.
The notice describes records of professional contacts, expertise, opinions, correspondence, meeting notes, workshops and roundtables. Individual organizations' conversations outside the shared inbox are governed by their own notices. Mailchimp handles the newsletter; listed website providers include Matomo, Heroku and Cloudflare. Conditional provisions permit sharing with co-funders or transferring the network/site to another organization. They do not establish that a particular transfer or disclosure occurred. Last updated is labelled October 2025 despite the currently displayed network name; do not date every sentence to a verified 2026 revision.
An important counterconstraint is explicit advice that readers concerned about government surveillance may use Tor or VPNs. The notice also states a 48-hour technical-data retention rule with testing/security exceptions. These are stated policies, not independently verified practice, but they are inconsistent with attributing an undifferentiated anti-anonymity doctrine to every aspect of this organization.
The [general Reset privacy notice](http[local research file] separately describes partner onboarding, sanctions checks via Plaid Monitor, human review, grant-progress records and information systems. It says partner funding records are retained for ten years after funding ends. These provisions identify types of records likely to exist and possible custodians; no particular grant file has been obtained. Sanctions screening is not evidence of ideological vetting. These general partner terms must not be substituted for an OSN contract.
The identifiable UK company
The [Companies House overview](http[local research file] identifies RESET TECH UK LIMITED, company 14982650, incorporated 5 July 2023, as a company limited by guarantee without share capital. The fresh [filing history](http[local research file] includes 2026 filings absent from an older indexed view. Accounts to 31 December 2025 are due 30 September 2026 and were not yet overdue at observation.
The [PSC register](http[local research file] lists Poppy Wood with more than 25% but no more than 50% of voting rights, and Dale Benjamin Scott with at least 75% and a right to appoint/remove directors. Report these as separate register statements, not additive equity percentages. The company has no share capital. Membership, timing or arrangements need reconciliation against the constitution and member register; the apparent discrepancy is not proof of misconduct. The companion uk-governance-articles.md reads the actual constitutional provisions.
What the 2024 accounts expose and leave unresolved
The official [2024 accounts PDF](http[local research file] filed 24 September 2025, reports GBP 1,571,393 turnover; GBP 70,631 operating expenses; GBP 1,451,987 administration expenses; and GBP 39,507 after-tax profit. These are whole-company figures, not OSN costs or identified donor receipts. The source's pretax/tax/after-tax printed numbers differ arithmetically by one pound; figures are preserved rather than corrected. No material inference is made from the difference.
Note 4 breaks administration expenses into salaries/wages/payroll GBP 76,881; benefits/insurance GBP 122,254; professional/consulting services GBP 402,105; subscriptions/software GBP 47,504; travel GBP 17,557; and other expenses GBP 785,686. The statement says five employees during 2024, without establishing five full-time equivalents for the whole year. It would be misleading to calculate an average annual salary by division. Expense names alone do not resolve outsourced staff, group recharge or grant pass-through amounts.
Year-end cash is GBP 40,997 in HSBC UK accounts. This identifies a banking relationship, not bank direction over advocacy. Note 7 puts GBP 1,156 receivable from Reset Tech Action gGmbH and GBP 10,743 directors' loan under debtors. The latter is owed to the company, not a director's funding contribution; individual identity and terms are not disclosed there. The named intercompany receivable is a concrete accounting relation, but does not identify all group transactions or establish parent control.
Note 9 records members' contingent GBP 1 winding-up guarantee. This is not invested capital or a measure of voting power. Note 11 says the company avails itself of FRS 102 section 33.1A exemption for disclosure of transactions with group undertakings. Note 1 claims the small-company cash-flow statement exemption. Report what the accounts invoke; the applicability of each exemption has not been independently audited. These provisions explain specific disclosure limits, not unlawful concealment. The filing does not provide a complete donor-to-project cash trail.
The accounts name Scott and Wood as directors and are approved 17 September 2025. Root visually inspected physical PDF pages 3, 4, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13 and 14; printed pages are one lower. These cover the directors, directors' narrative, signatures/responsibilities, income statement, accounting policies, expenses, debtors and related-party notes. No external audit opinion is claimed. Scanned pages have no usable pypdf text; the local text file contains page markers only and must not be treated as OCR.
Evidential consequence
The supported path is informal collaboration hosted through Reset's shared operating infrastructure, with identifiable UK company directors, constitutional decision rules and some group accounting relations. It is not yet a demonstrated single legal entity controlling all federated activity. The missing records with high value are the OSN operating/transition agreement, division of employer and contracting responsibilities, related-party service arrangements, member register and basis for PSC notices, plus any network budget or delegated editorial authority. Public procedures make these plausible targets but do not prove a particular document or clause exists.
Acquisition custody
The network notice was read both through indexed primary text and an ordinary successful GET, then locally extracted with scripts/navigation removed. The official accounts link initially produced a stale expired signed redirect in the web reader. One ordinary GET of the observed stable public Companies House endpoint succeeded; no credentials, access restrictions or signed-token reuse were involved. The original is retained. No new OCR dependency was installed. Rendered PNGs are for document inspection, not artwork.