Hellopeter
Share Your Experience
JV
Jan V

1 reviews | Active since Jun 2025

24 Dec 2025, 06:58

Consumer review removed despite written substantiation – concerns about platform independence

I am posting this review to record a factual and concerning experience with HelloPeter’s dispute and moderation process.

I previously lodged a review against Revibe concerning misleading advertising, specifically the use of a prominently advertised “from” price on social media that was not realistically attainable when clicking through to the advertiser’s own website.

HelloPeter contacted me to state that the business had disputed my review and requested confirmation and supporting documentation. I responded in writing within the stipulated timeframe and confirmed that:

My review was 100% accurate and made in good faith

The complaint related to pre-purchase misleading advertising, not a completed transaction

No invoice or proof of payment can exist in such cases because the misleading conduct occurs before purchase

The facts were objectively verifiable by reviewing the advertiser’s social media ads and website pricing

Despite this detailed response and clarification, HelloPeter removed the original review.

At no point was I provided with:

A list of specific factual inaccuracies in my review

An explanation of why transactional documentation is required for a non-transactional advertising complaint

A clear policy justification for removal after written substantiation was supp****

This raises a serious concern for consumers: If reviews relating to misleading advertising can be removed simply because an advertiser disputes them—despite reasoned responses from the reviewer—then the platform’s independence and consumer-protection role are open to question.

I am not alleging malice or bias. I am recording my direct experience so other consumers understand how disputes of this nature are handled in practice.

Transparency in moderation is essential for trust. In this instance, that transparency was lacking.

0
Replies (2)
Hellopeter
Hellopeter's reply24 Dec 2025, 10:43
Official
Hi Jan, 

Thank you for your feedback.

Hellopeter is a platform for sharing verified consumer experiences. Reviews are required to be based on direct, first-hand interactions with a business. In this case, the review was removed following a dispute, as it could not be substantiated as a direct consumer engagement in line with our moderation guidelines.The removal of the review does not reflect a position on the advertising practices referenced. Concerns relating to advertising compliance may be raised with the relevant regulatory authorities.We appreciate your input and remain committed to maintaining a fair and consistent moderation process.
JV
Jan V's update28 Dec 2025, 12:51
Reviewer Update
Thank you for your response. I respectfully note that your explanation does not address the core concern raised. Viewing, assessing, and relying on a business’s public advertising and pricing representations is a direct, first-hand consumer interaction. Advertising exists precisely to induce consumer decision-making prior to any transaction. Many forms of misleading conduct occur before a purchase is made, which is why consumer-protection frameworks globally do not require proof of payment to assess advertising practices. My review did not allege a completed transaction, nor did it need to. The complaint related specifically to a prominently advertised “from” price that was not realistically attainable when engaging with the advertiser’s own website. This is objectively verifiable through the advertiser’s publicly accessible materials. While I understand that HelloPeter may choose to limit its scope to post-transaction experiences, that limitation was not clearly communicated during the dispute process. Substantiation was requested, provided in writing, and acknowledged—yet the review was removed without:
  • Identification of factual inaccuracies,
  • Clarification of why advertising-based complaints are excluded,
  • Or reference to a specific moderation rule explaining why written substantiation was insufficient.
To be clear, I am not asserting that HelloPeter endorses or rejects the advertising practices in question. I am recording a procedural experience in which a substantiated, good-faith review concerning misleading advertising was removed following a business dispute, without transparent reasoning. Consumers rely on platforms like HelloPeter to understand how complaints are handled in practice. Transparency around moderation criteria—especially where advertising-related concerns are concerned—is essential to maintaining that trust. This response is posted for informational purposes so that other consumers can make informed decisions about how and where to raise concerns of this nature.