Reviewing an AI tool's data terms for customer data

Before customers' data goes into an AI tool, the business needs the tool's data terms to say five things: that the vendor is the business's processor, that it will not train on the data, how long it keeps it, where it goes, and how the vendor will help when something goes wrong. Most tools' terms say some of those on some tiers, and the gap between what the business has promised its customers and what the tool permits is where the breach sits. The review reads the data terms for the tier in question and reports the gap. For £595, fixed, with delivery in five working days, I review the AI supplier's terms for the business and note what they permit, what they reserve and what to ask for.

Who this is for

Businesses in England and Wales about to process customers', clients' or users' personal data in an AI tool, whether as controllers or as processors for their own business customers.

What matters in an AI tool's data terms

Controller, processor and the role the tool's terms claim

entering personal data into an AI tool is processing under the UK GDPR and brings with it the need for a lawful basis, a notice to the individuals, an Article 28 data processing agreement with the provider and, where people are affected, an Article 35 impact assessment, and the review starts with the role the vendor's terms claim: a processor on the business's instructions (the position customer data needs), a controller for some purposes (abuse monitoring, service improvement, analytics), or a controller for everything (common on consumer tiers, and fatal for customer data); the review checks that the data processing addendum applies to the tier, contains the Article 28 terms, and confines the vendor's own purposes to what the business can justify to its customers.

The training exclusion and the words that make it real

the provider's terms set the position on training on inputs and on retention, with training generally excluded on business tiers and generally permitted on consumer tiers, and the review reads the exclusion for what it covers (training, fine-tuning, 'improving the services', evaluation, human review), what it leaves out (aggregated or de-identified data derived from inputs, which some vendors reserve), whether it is a default or an opt-out setting the business must configure, whether it applies to the tool's own features and to the third-party models behind them, and whether it survives a change of terms; a business that tells its customers their data is not used for training needs the exclusion in writing for its tier, and the note says whether it has it.

Retention, logs and the data the tool keeps for itself

The review reports how long the vendor retains inputs, outputs, conversation history and logs, for what purposes (the business's own use, abuse monitoring, legal compliance), whether zero-retention or short-retention options exist and for which tiers or APIs, whether the vendor's staff or contractors may read inputs and under what conditions, whether backups are covered, and what deletion on the business's request or on termination means in practice; the business's retention policy, its customers' DPAs and its privacy notice have to be consistent with the answer.

Sub-processors, locations and the transfers the business must disclose

The review identifies the vendor's sub-processors (the model providers behind the features, the hosting, the support tools), the processing locations, the transfer safeguards under Article 46 of the UK GDPR the vendor relies on (its addendum to the EU clauses, the international data transfer agreement, certification under the UK extension to the data privacy framework), the notification of sub-processor changes and the business's right to object, and whether a regional processing option exists; the business's own DPA with its customers must list the vendor and its sub-processors and disclose the transfers, and the business's privacy notice must say where the data goes, so the review reports what the business will have to tell its customers.

Security, breach notification and the assistance the business will need

The review checks the vendor's security commitments and certifications (an information security standard, a service organisation report), the breach notification timing (in time for the business's seventy-two hours under Article 33, which means hours or a short stated period from the vendor's awareness, not 'promptly'), the assistance with subject access requests and impact assessments the addendum provides (and at what cost), the audit route (reports first, on-site audit on notice where they are insufficient), and the vendor's liability for a breach (within a cap that is usually low); nothing confidential (trade secrets, clients' data, unreleased plans) goes into a tool whose terms let the provider train on or keep the input, because the Trade Secrets (Enforcement, etc.) Regulations 2018 and the business's confidentiality obligations turn on the steps taken to keep it secret, and the security terms are what make the tool a reasonable step.

The business's own promises and whether the tool lets it keep them

The note closes by setting the tool's terms against the business's own commitments: its privacy notice (does it describe this tool, these purposes, these transfers), its customer terms (does the training position match), its DPAs with business customers (is this vendor an authorised sub-processor, with the right to object given), its retention policy (does the tool's retention fit), its impact assessment (does the use need one, and does the tool's documentation support it), and where the tool's features make or shape decisions about people, the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025 amended Article 22 of the UK GDPR so that a solely automated decision with legal or similarly significant effects is lawful outside special category data only with the safeguards of information, representations, human intervention and the right to contest, which the tool must let the business provide; the note lists what to ask the vendor for and what to change on the business's side before the data goes in.

What it costs

AI supplier review, £595. You are buying an AI product and want to know what you are agreeing to. Five working days.

AI provisions in a contract, £595. Review or draft AI-specific terms in a supply or customer agreement. Five working days.

Email me at geoffrey@caesar.co.uk with what you need and any documents, and I will confirm the scope and the fee in writing, usually the same working day.

What you get

• An internal AI use policy your staff will follow, rather than a document that bans everything and is quietly ignored
• Contract provisions covering output ownership, training data, confidentiality and liability
• A defensible position to give customers who ask what your AI governance looks like
• Review of your AI suppliers' terms, including what they reserve the right to change
• Practical guidance on what to permit, what to restrict and what to prohibit outright
• One round of amendments

What is not included

• Technical AI assurance, model testing or bias auditing
• Sector-specific regulatory approval
• Advice on non-UK regulatory regimes beyond flagging where they apply
• Ongoing regulatory monitoring

Questions I am often asked

The vendor says it is our processor. Is that enough?

Only if the data processing addendum applies to your tier, contains the Article 28 terms and confines the vendor's own purposes to what you can justify. Many vendors reserve controller purposes (abuse monitoring, service improvement) that the review reads for scope.

How do we know the training exclusion is real?

It is in writing for your tier, covers training, fine-tuning and 'improvement', applies to the third-party models behind the features, is not an opt-out you have failed to set, and survives a change of terms. The note says which of those your vendor's terms meet.

What do we have to tell our own customers?

That this tool is used, for what, by which vendor, where the data goes, how long it is kept and the training position, in the privacy notice, the customer terms and (for business customers) the DPA's sub-processor list. The note lists the updates.

Related guidance and services

• AI contracts and AI use policies, £595, the service this page describes
• SaaS and technology contracts, £995
• Data protection agreements and privacy terms, £795
• AI clauses for a business using AI to handle customer data
• Reviewing a supplier's data processing agreement

This page is general guidance for businesses in England and Wales, not advice on your own circumstances. Last reviewed: October 2026. Email geoffrey@caesar.co.uk.