Examples

What a case looks like from start to finish

These are illustrative examples built from the patterns we see repeatedly. They are not verified client case studies, and we do not publish client names or profiles without written permission.

Illustrative example

Local dental clinic

3.2 → 4.7

Four reviews removed

A former employee and a competitor posted one-star reviews within the same fortnight, neither with any patient record. The clinic's practice management system confirmed no matching appointments; both accounts had reviewed several competing clinics in the same city.

Conflict of interest · fake engagement

Illustrative example

Independent moving company

3.9 → 4.5

Three reviews removed

Identical text appeared across four unrelated local businesses inside a week. The pattern — not the wording of any single review — carried the case.

Fake engagement

Illustrative example

Boutique hotel

4.1 → 4.6

Two reviews removed, one withdrawn

A guest demanded a free night in writing and posted a one-star review when refused. The preserved correspondence resolved the dispute; a second review described a property in another city entirely.

Review blackmail · wrong property

Illustrative example

Multi-site dental group

12 listings assessed

Nine reviews removed

Head office had no view of branch-level attacks. The assessment found misattributed reviews sitting on the wrong branch and two accounts hitting three sites each.

Misattribution · coordinated posting

Illustrative example

E-commerce seller

4.0 → 4.4

Six pieces of feedback struck

Delivery complaints on orders fulfilled by the marketplace itself, which the platform's own policy excludes from seller feedback.

Platform-fulfilled delivery

Illustrative example

Law firm

Two reviews removed

One response published

An opposing party and a declined enquiry had both posted. Conflict checks showed no client relationship in either matter. A third review, from a genuine former client, stayed — and got a careful reply instead.

Non-client reviews

Why illustrative: confidentiality is part of the engagement. Publishing a client's listing would expose exactly the profile they hired us to protect. Every figure above is an example, not a promise — the platform decides each case on its own facts.
What they have in common

Three things every successful case had

A named policy ground

Not “unfair” — a specific clause from the platform's published rules, quoted in the submission.

Records from the business

Booking systems, invoices, employment dates, conflict checks. The platform cannot see these; you can.

Follow-up

First decisions are frequently automated. The cases that succeed are the ones somebody chased.

Find out which of these your situation resembles

The free assessment tells you, per review, which ground applies and how strong the case is.

or call +1 773 541 4793 · +1 315 898 1150