By industry
Fake reviews don’t look the same in every trade.
A vet gets a social-media pile-on from people who’ve never been clients. A mover gets reviews for a job a broker sold to someone else. A salon gets reviews following a stylist who left. Same policy clauses, completely different evidence.
Each page below covers the attack patterns specific to that trade, the evidence Google can actually verify, and the policy clause each pattern can be argued under.
Healthcare & professional
Dentists and dental practices
HIPAA-baiting reviews, never-a-patient claims, and ex-staff retaliation.
Multi-location dental / DSO
Portfolio filing across rooftops, on one consolidated invoice.
Law firms
Opposing parties, Rule 1.6 constraints, and why you can't reply.
HVAC
Competitor clusters and quote-only reviewers.
Med Spas
competitor injectors, no-show consults, and results complaints you can't legally answer.
Chiropractors
ideological drive-bys, insurance disputes, and competitor clinics.
Veterinarians
grief-driven attacks, pile-ons from people who were never clients, and cost complaints.
Real Estate Agents
opposing-side buyers, rival agents, and people who toured a property and never worked with you.
Home services & trades
Plumbers
Emergency-call price disputes and documentary contradiction.
Contractors
Sub disputes, third-party reviewers, and who counts as the customer.
Restaurants
Delivery-driver complaints and wrong-location reviews.
Auto repair
Estimate disputes and reviews meant for a different shop.
Roofers
storm-chaser smears, insurance-claim disputes, and reviews from people who only got a quote.
Moving Companies
broker confusion, competitor smears, and reviews for a different mover entirely.
Retail, auto & consumer
Car Dealerships
finance-denial reviews, rival stores, and complaints about the manufacturer rather than the.
Gyms
cancellation-policy reviews from ex-members, competitor studios, and trial visitors who never.
Salons
reviews following a stylist who left, competitor shops, and no-show fee disputes.
The same clause, wearing a different uniform
Google does not have a dental clause or a roofing clause. It has one content policy, and every filing has to name a clause from it. What changes by trade is the disguise the violation arrives in, and therefore the evidence that proves it. Below is the same handful of clauses as they actually turn up, taken from the trade pages themselves.
Conflict of interest
A reviewer with a stake against the business: a competitor, a former employee, someone tied to either. It turns up across trades, and the evidence often sits on Google itself, in the reviewer's own profile.
Aesthetics is a small world in any metro. Reviews from people who work at, own, or are married to a competing practice do show up, and the reviewer's own public profile often gives it away. They've reviewed three other med spas in the same city, all glowingly except yours.
Chiropractic is dense in most suburbs, and competitor reviews are common. The tell is usually a reviewer who has left detailed positive reviews for one nearby clinic and a single hostile one for you.
After a hail event, out-of-area outfits arrive and compete hard for the same insurance jobs. Reviews from accounts with no local footprint, appearing in a tight window, disparaging the established local company, are a recognisable pattern.
A competing agent in your farm area reviewing you, sometimes through a spouse or an assistant's account. Public licensing records and professional profiles frequently establish the relationship without you having to assert anything.
Never a customer, or off-topic
The reviewer is describing a phone call, a quote, a competitor, or someone else's business. Nothing about a visit that happened.
Someone books a consultation, hears the price for a package of treatments, doesn't proceed, and leaves a one-star review about cost. They were never treated. In many cases they never attended at all, the review is about a phone quote.
A one-star review from someone who has never been a patient, arguing that chiropractic is not real medicine. It's a view about the field, not an account of a visit. These often arrive in small clusters after something goes viral online.
A cluster of one-star reviews arriving within days of a post circulating, from accounts with no connection to your area and often no other review activity at all. They describe the story they read rather than a visit they made.
You bid the job properly, a cheaper crew undercut you, and the homeowner leaves a one-star about your estimate. No work was done. The review is about a number on a piece of paper, not about a roof.
Advertising a competitor
One line against you and three naming somebody else, sometimes with a discount code. These exist to move traffic.
A review that spends one line criticising you and three lines naming another clinic, sometimes with a discount code. These exist to move traffic, not to describe an experience.
A review whose actual content is a recommendation for another agent or brokerage, with your name attached to a one-star as the hook.
A one-star whose actual content promotes another studio's offer, sometimes with a referral code. It exists to move traffic.
A stylist leaves and their client list follows, leaving one-star reviews that name the new salon. The review's function is promotional, and the promotional content is usually right there in the text.
What Google’s policy is written to cover
Google’s content policy is about what a review is, not how fair it feels. In every trade, a person who was genuinely served and describes their own experience is inside that policy, however unfair the wording: price complaints from real customers, wait times, staff manner, a subjective view of a result. A clause has to name something else in the review.
A further 5 patterns across those pages are marked grey area, which means the argument turns on a document you hold rather than on the review text. A booking log, a job sheet, a signed estimate. A scan of the text alone can read those wrong in either direction.
Every filing we make names the clause it relies on, and you pick which of your reviews go forward.
The clauses these patterns are filed under
Google's published rules, one page each, with what qualifies and what does not.
Check one review before reading a whole trade page
Guides
Short answers
One question per page.
Not on the list?
The process is the same for any business with a Google listing, the audit scores your reviews against Google’s published policy clauses regardless of trade. Free, no card, no signup to see the report. You’re billed only when Google actually removes a review.