Reputation Management Agency
How We Assess Review Removal Cases
An evidence-led methodology for reviewing potentially policy-breaking reviews and managing legitimate reports and appeals.
- Discreet
- Enquiries handled with care
- UK wide
- London-based specialist team
- Search
- Removal, suppression and review repair
- Policy
- Policy-based, lawful removal requests
Overview
Why This Matters For Your Brand
Last policy review: 11 October 2026. Our review-dispute methodology explains what we investigate, the evidence we ask for, the limits of platform moderation and how we report case outcomes. The aim is to distinguish a review that breaches a platform rule from genuine criticism that a business would prefer not to display.
Our eligibility test comes before any removal request
We examine the exact review URL, publishing platform, date, business or employer profile, claimed policy violation and any past flagging or appeal decision. The report must refer to a real rule. Being upsetting, commercially damaging, anonymous or rated one star does not by itself establish an infringement. We do not claim a platform will remove a compliant review.
Policy-ground matrix: Google, Trustpilot and Glassdoor
Google Business Profile: Google permits reporting of reviews that violate its content policies, including eligible spam, impersonation, harassment or certain prohibited personal information. A one-time appeal is available for certain rejected reports through the Reviews Management Tool, with Google's instructions permitting selection of up to ten eligible reviews in a single appeal. See Google's official review-reporting and appeal instructions and our Google review-removal service.
Trustpilot: Businesses may flag reviews on specific guideline grounds, including fake experiences, harmful material, personal information and reviews attributed to the wrong company, subject to the published definitions. Trustpilot does not allow misuse of flagging merely because feedback is negative. Its 23 April 2026 update introduced an appeal link inside flagged-review decision emails rather than replying to those messages. See the Trustpilot business guidelines, appeal process update and our Trustpilot dispute service.
Glassdoor: Glassdoor publishes and moderates employee and employer feedback under its Community Guidelines. It welcomes positive and negative opinions, protects reviewer anonymity and says it does not take sides in ordinary factual disputes. Specific guideline breaches may be reported, including some forms of abuse, spam, inauthentic submissions, prohibited disclosures or incentivised content. See Glassdoor's Community Guidelines and our Glassdoor review-dispute service. We do not attempt to identify anonymous reviewers.
The seven stages of a review-integrity case
1. Record the review accurately. Capture its public URL, exact wording, account or business profile, date and current visibility. Do not alter or selectively quote evidence.
2. Classify the alleged breach. Identify the precise official policy category, document what is known and distinguish fact from suspicion.
3. Screen for disqualifiers. If the review describes a plausible genuine experience and no rule is breached, recommend an appropriate response or service improvement instead of a takedown request.
4. Build a proportionate evidence dossier. Collect only the material necessary to establish the claimed rule breach: relevant screenshots, objective dates, a wrong-business reference or preserved extortion correspondence. Do not solicit passwords, intimidate reviewers or circulate sensitive medical/employee records through standard forms.
5. Submit through the permitted channel. Assist the authorised business account holder with a clear, accurate flag or report, without inventing evidence or overstating what records show.
6. Track decisions and eligible appeals. Record each platform's decision and any available appeal route. A decision to keep a review online is not, by itself, grounds for endless reports.
7. Close the loop. Report the outcome, remaining risks, recommended public response and whether ongoing monitoring for multiple brands or locations makes sense. The final moderation decision belongs to the platform.
Cases we will not present as guaranteed takedowns
We do not accept a review for removal merely because it is negative, the reviewer uses a pseudonym, a customer account cannot immediately be identified, a former employee criticises management or the business disagrees with a rating. We do not fabricate purchases or employment records, encourage fake-positive reviews, provide guaranteed removal percentages, claim a special moderation partnership or use threats to silence legitimate criticism.
Evidence checklist before contacting us
- The public review URL and platform name.
- The business or employer profile affected.
- The precise policy category suspected of being breached.
- The dates of any earlier reports and the decisions received.
- A short factual summary of the evidence available (without unnecessary private documents).
- The number of reviews and business locations or brands involved.
Request a review-removal eligibility assessment or . We will tell you when a report appears unsupported and discuss realistic alternatives.
FAQs
Frequently asked questions
Businesses can usually flag eligible reviews directly and without paying a platform fee. Professional support focuses on reviewing the evidence, identifying the correct current rule, preparing accurate submissions, managing appeals and maintaining records across more complex cases.
Explore
Related Reputation Services
Contact
Inquire About How We Assess Review Removal Cases
Send a short brief and a reputation specialist replies within one working day.
- UK+44 20 7183 3436
- UK+44 7454 539583
- info@pearllemongroup.com
- 1st floor, 22 York Buildings, London WC2N 6JU, UK
Schedule a Scoping Session
Need a private assessment of your search results?
Book a 30-minute call with a specialist. A clear view of what to fix first.