Should the Government tackle bogus Google reviews?

Reviews are a hugely important tool when it comes to choosing a new product or service. Smaller firms in particular know the value of good reviews in building their brand.

Positive reviews on sites like Amazon, Google and Tripadvisor can influence customers’ buying decisions, help build a loyal following and ultimately make or break a business.

However, it is alarmingly simple for unscrupulous traders to cheat the system by writing or buying glowing reviews, artificially inflating their quality - or by weaponising bad reviews to harm a rival.

At present, tech firms in most cases have no legal responsibility to prevent these practices from appearing on their sites, so they continue to flourish.

Which? investigations have exposed the ease with which sites like Facebook, Google and Trustpilot could be infiltrated by brokers who sell positive reviews for as little as £4, from restaurants and shops to rental companies and even dentists. On Amazon, we’ve also found that reviews can be ‘repurposed’ - in some cases for products that are completely unrelated. The result is lost trade for honest businesses as well as the stifling of competition.

But fake reviews are not the only online business practices that lead to worse deals for businesses and consumers. Subscription traps, where firms make exiting a contract difficult, and drip pricing, where customers are only shown one price up-front and then hit with further expenses later in the purchase process, are also in need of tough action.

Encouragingly, the government has indicated that it plans to hand the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) tougher powers to clamp down on these issues.

These will include making it clearly illegal to pay someone to write a fake review or host a review without taking steps to check if it’s real, as well as powers to fine firms that flout the rules directly. Subscription traps will be tackled by ensuring businesses provide clearer information to customers before they enter a subscription and issue reminders that free trials or low-cost introductory offers are coming to an end before they auto-renew.

This is a step in the right direction. Our consumer and competition laws are in desperate need of modernisation.

Tech giants must have the legal responsibility to remove fraudulent content from their sites, while regulators, from the CMA to the Civil Aviation Authority when it comes to rogue airlines, need real teeth to take on firms that break the rules.

The ability to fine firms, and order them to compensate customers, acts as a powerful deterrent and avoids the lengthy process of going through the courts.

The example of the CMA threatening legal action against an online ticket seller is illustrative of the issues regulators face in bringing about consumer justice after a spate of complaints of reselling tickets at inflated prices without warning of the risks. But it took nearly six years, and the threat of legal action through the courts, for the seller to finally change its practices. A regulator with fining powers gets it done much more quickly, boosting consumer’s confidence and ensuring faster resolutions if similar actions occur in the future.

The government recently announced its intention to bring forward a Digital Markets, Consumer and Competition Bill which will hand regulators the tools they need. Which? has campaigned for new laws to protect consumers and honest businesses for years, but the current cost of living crisis means tougher rules are even more important. Consumers need to know that their hard-earned money isn’t being squandered on products and services that aren’t up to scratch. And honest firms need to know that they are competing on a level playing field.

Rocio Concha is Director of Policy and Advocacy at Which?