Woman says challenged review on allAgents is identical to one that has been on Trustpilot for a year

A reviewer of Purplebricks, who has received an email from allAgents querying whether her review of Purplebricks is genuine, says that an identical assessment is on Trustpilot – where only reviews from verified customers appear.

Joanne Buckley received a note from Martin McKenzie of allAgents which says: “Purplebricks has flagged up your review amongst others as being a fake review.

“In order to combat this allegation, we are asking customers if they could forward us something that supports your relationship with them. Examples could be an email, letter, contract etc.

“Would you be able to assist us by providing this information?”

Last week, allAgents first took down 71 reviews from its site after they were challenged. It has since removed the Purplebricks page altogether.

However, Buckley has told EYE that the challenged review on allAgents was exactly the same as one that she posted up on Trustpilot on September 26 last year.

She said she cut and pasted the review to post up an identical version on allAgents.

Her one-star review can still be seen on Trustpilot.

https://uk.trustpilot.com/users/57e985d80000ff000a47f94d

We have given Purplebricks the opportunity to comment.

Separately, we also asked Trustpilot about the rating carried on its site about allAgents, where it has earned two stars; and also the difference in how the ‘calls to action’ on Google are phrased  in allAgents and Purplebricks (see the screengrabs below).

A spokesperson for Trustpilot told us: “At Trustpilot we operate an ‘Open Platform’, that means a consumer is free to review any business if they’ve had a service or purchase experience, including businesses that do not yet have a Trustpilot profile and that includes review sites.

“There are currently over 180,000 businesses reviewed on Trustpilot.”

In response to our second question, the spokesperson said: “The brief call to action text displayed on the Google page varies according to the current Tustpilot rating the company has.

“The reason for the difference you’ve identified is that Purplebricks UK currently has a five-star rating and allAgents has a two-star rating.

“The call to action is different for each of the possible star ratings between 1 and 5. However, it is the same for all businesses, e.g. the text is the same for all businesses with say a two-star rating.”

 

 

x

Email the story to a friend



34 Comments

  1. cyberduck46

    Surely AllAgents must be finished as a review site.

     

    Removing a valid review because a company threatens legal action.

     

    AllAgents and any other review site needs a business model which validates for authenticity as part of their procedures in the same way that TrustPilot does. Just showing 1 of their reviews is valid doesn’t do that. However showing that one of the reviews is invalid makes them liable to being sued.

     

     

     

     

     

    Report
    1. PeeBee

      OH, BEHAVE, will you!

      You know the background – stop spinning it like a demented Tasmanian Devil.

      We know that howwible people are telling you that your schoolboy crush is a bad’un and you don’t like it.  AND you’ve got competition for Bestest #Fanboy status as well with domboy beating you so far by a twitching nose in the #bunnyboiler stakes, so you’re thinking every little helps – ‘cos Tesco says so and you believe every word that every company says on their adverts, don’t you?.

      But the bottom of the barrel is not the place to scrape for good ideas, ducky.  All you have found there so far is detritus – the stuff that’s not even solid enough to form **** – and you’re now harvesting the very worst of that.

      You need to up your game, Sir.

      Report
  2. Hillofwad71

    https://uk.trustpilot.com/review/www.purplebricks.com

     

    They  are still at it despite announcing the fact it has been dealt with the  5* reviews still arrivng thick and fast  from the UK  boosting the rating but funny enough the 1* ones are disappearing!

     

    You have  to question both Pilot and Bricks here.Pilot have the database of home addresses of the reviewers They can distinguish   UK from USA and instantly   remove.

     

    Bricks have indicated a computer glitch How on earth can Californians  be confident that  their  houses  arent being marketed in Clitheroe Very amateurish

    Report
  3. cyberduck46

    >:You have  to question both Pilot and Bricks here.Pilot have the database of home addresses of the reviewers They can distinguish   UK from USA and instantly   remove.

     

    You could then be removing genuine reviewers of PB USA.

    Report
    1. Hillofwad71

      Cybs You cant  be serious  How is Dave who lives in Clitheroe ,lancs  praising his LPE be a genuine reviewer in Los Angeles .The clue is in the reviewers  address held on their database

      Report
      1. cyberduck46

        Hillofwad71,

         

        I just sold a property in the U.S. and my address is in the UK.

         

        Try and put yourself in the shoes of TrustPilot, they can’t just start removing reviews based on the address of the reviewer.

        Report
        1. PeeBee

          “Try and put yourself in the shoes of TrustPilot, they can’t just start removing reviews based on the address of the reviewer.”

          Oh, ducky – what have I told you about the stuff at the bottom of that barrel?

          Have a read of THIS Purplebricks United States of America (USA) ‘review’ – posted SEVEN HOURS ago and as yet unchallenged (but there are two others as old as TWENTY ONE HOURS):

          https://uk.trustpilot.com/reviews/59c9bcaed2c87503046183ce

          Maybe – just maybe – the title gives the merest of a hintlet to TrustlessPilot, to PB UK, USA and wherever – and to the rest of the civilised world that take no 5h!t from anyone, for that matter:

          “on selling my house in Forest Green, surrey England”

          No doubt you’ll be scouring that barrel bottom for a response, ducky…

          Report
        2. g4lvo17

          how convenient that you have just sold a property in the good old US of A, always have an answer don’t you !!!!!

          Report
        3. PeeBee

          “I just sold a property in the U.S. and my address is in the UK.”

          Is that right, ducky?

          Funny – you’ve never brought that into conversation before now.

          I would have thought that someone as analytical as you would want to draw a web of comparisons between your ‘experiences’ on the US Real Estate market to that of your arduous slog on the UK side of the pond.

          Makes me wonder why…

          Report
      2. g4lvo17

        After all the comments from TrustPilot last week about a technical error in the reviews being posted to the wrong site, amazed to still see reviews being posted today from uk clients, this is absolute bull kaka , why have they not turned the link off, it is a simple step and would immediately stop this happening, obviously they still want to keep the reviews flowing to build momentum. I hope they realise that the American authorities don’t do ” informally resolved ” they do ” stick your ass in Jail “

        Report
        1. PeeBee

          Look at the last one posted – FOURTEEN HOURS AGO.

          It is entitled

          on selling my house in Forest Green, surrey england

          Why on earth would someone add the word ‘england’ if they didn’t think it was entirely necessary?

          Like, for instance, might they do that if they were fully aware that the ‘review’ was being used in, say, another CONTINENT…??

          Oh – and it should also be mentioned that the poster has previously given the company a glowing 5-star review on the UK site… SIX WEEKS AGO…

          Report
    2. Property Pundit

      cyberduck46 – Are you the cyberduck poster on Purplebricks Share Chat on London South East?

      Report
      1. cyberduck46

        Yes, that’s me.

         

        And before you ask, no I don’t own shares but I do follow developments very closely because I am an investor and have owned shares in the past.

         

        Hillofwad71, who has been a long time poster on lse, would be able to vouch for the consistency of my statements between here, there (lse) and in private communication with him.

        Report
  4. Robert May

    That story is embarrassing. In my opinion it epitomises all that is wrong with the passive intermediary internet listing industry; taking  a fee from vendors in negative equity, giving them false hope and expectation with negligent advice then threatening litigation to recover the listing loan they were unaware they’d taken out.

     

     

    Report
    1. cyberduck46

      Yet you were supportive of the traditional Agent when they collected £4000 from the old lady who sold her property to her son after the agent had failed to sell for 18 months.

       

      http://www.propertyindustryeye.com/elderly-woman-charged-agents-commission-after-property-failed-to-sell-allegation/

       

      Your comment “If there is a contractual reason why the client should pay I’m not aware of an upper age limit that says anyone can dip out of their responsibility because they’re old.”

       

      I knew there’d be some hypocrisy further down the line when I bookmarked that one. 🙂

       

       

      Report
      1. smile please

        Bit of a sad life, bookmarking ‘That’ Robert May’s comments just to use at a later date.

        How is you house sale going Ducky? – Not exchanged yet? Why is that? been in hand a while …….

        Report
        1. cyberduck46

          smile please,

           

          What is really sad is what is going on here with all the hypocrisy and bias.

           

          People reporting online Agents to ASA when they are themselves misleading people on their own websites etc. etc.

           

           

           

           

          Report
          1. Property Pundit

            ‘when they are themselves misleading people on their own websites etc. etc’

            Links, evidence or retraction. Your choice.

            Report
      2. dompritch134

        Well noted CyberDuck the hypocrisy here has no bounds.

        Report
        1. Robert May

          I might be a hypocrite   but I am not  deliberately or negligently misleading people. I am not breaching CPR’s, BPRs or misleading investors with false claims and promises.  I’ve never  listed properties owned by relatives to inflate  my register.  Never portaljuggled, never undersold a  property to any connected person, never been in front of a disciplinary  committee, and never lied on national radio.

          You might consider me a hypocrite but if that is all you’ve got on me, congratulations!

           

          Report
          1. cyberduck46

            >I might be a hypocrite   but I am not  deliberately or negligently misleading people.

             

            But you are Robert.

             

            You are misleading people with your hypocrisy.

             

            All that nonsense about portaljuggling and meetings with Trading standards was also misleading in that people reading the comments on here would have thought there was going to be some national scandal involving Trading Standards.

             

            Report
            1. Robert May

              95% of what was going on has stopped. What James Munro and Rob Brown do or don’t do  isn’t something I can control. All I can do is  provide evidence of what I have observed and continue to observe an allow them to do what they are paid to do; enforce compliance of CPR and BPRs

              Just because you don’t like it doesn’t make it hypocrisy.

              I have only ever posted what I know to be correct and can evidence. That might be inconvenient for people who want to claim they complete on more transactions than they do or claim to achieve a higher % of asking price by using very selective data, but fact are facts.

              Let me ask you some closed questions

              Is a negotiator with an NVQ in public service and a total of 3 months estate agency training  qualified enough to be considered an expert estate agent?

              Would someone living in Chester be considered to be local to the Wirral?

              Is a 50% share of a flat worth the same as 100%

              Will a property being marketed at 166% of realistic market value attract  any interest?

              Is it morally right to take money from someone you know has no realistic chance of achieving a sale based on advice you expertly know to be incorrect?

              Even with your zealous,sycophantic defence of Purplebricks I really doubt  you could seriously justify a yes answer to any of those questions.  (I am fairly certain you’ll try to justify all 5)

               

              Report
        2. PeeBee

          Wouldn’t be a show without Punch – would it.

          Punch drunk, some might say…

          But this proves inconclusively that there’s room at the bottom of the barrel for two – even if there’s nothing there of use nor ornament.

          Report
          1. cyberduck46

            Nothing on topic to say as usual PeeBee.

             

            Don’t expect a reply you’ve wasted enough of my time.

            Report
            1. PeeBee

              OI! I wasn’t actually referring to you, dippy ducky!

              At least try to keep up, won’t you…

              Report
      3. Robert May

        there is a bit of a difference between the two cases, in one instance there was a contract that complied with  the agent’s legal duty of care and skill. The agent exercised care and skill, fulfilled their obligation under the contract and so the fee was due.

        In this case a woman with virtually no experience or relevant qualification mislead the principal  by marketing a property at 166% of its open market value.  There is case law precedent that an agent  should exercise proper care and skill, if they don’t they waive their rights to a fee and are liable for any losses by the client.

        An NVQ in public service plus 3 months as a trainee negotiator is in no way qualification to claim expert status. Failing to  realise  a shared equity property has a limited market is naive. Failing to divide the online  algorithm guess at  value by 2 to account for the 50/50 ownership fails to provide the principal with a duty of care and skill.

        Taking money from anyone with no realistic chance of fulfilling the outcome the client is expecting is deceitful.

        As I said the epitome of all that is wrong with passive intermediaries passing themselves off as estate agents

        Report
        1. cyberduck46

          >The agent exercised care and skill, fulfilled their obligation under the contract and so the fee was due.

           

          You really don’t know whether they exercised due care and skill. You just assume that all traditional agents do. You seem oblivious to what homeowners are telling the industry. Estate Agents are not trusted.

           

          Robert, you are not qualified and even objective enough  (now proven) to determine whether any case law applies.

           

          Do you even know that what the woman is claiming is completely true? Just because it’s not a fake review doesn’t mean it’s a fully factual account.

           

          Assuming that the account is fully factual then does this influence your objectivity in connection with other reviews?When you look at TrustPilot reviews do you think that all the positive ones are fake and all the negative ones aren’t? Do you imagine that all the customers who haven’t provided feedback do so because they’ve had a bad experience?

           

          The number of bad TrustPilot reviews is really very small considering they have now had over 80,000 customers (I’ve guessed conservatively at 20,000 since the end of the last financial year) in the last 3 1/2 years. I know you probably think (or would like people to believe) that there are thousands of negative reviews that have been removed but just look at the motivation from the reviewer above. She’s even posted on two websites. It is typical for people who are upset to go to great lengths to get some revenge against somebody they consider to have treated them wrongly so I just don’t buy these arguments put forward here and I have been around a bit. I was there when it was all happening in the internet marketing world (when TrustPilot were founded) back in 2007 and earlier. I’ve seen the makeup of reviews before companies were able to flag them as suspicious and it wasn’t a pretty site. Multiple negative reviews by disgruntled customers and multiple fake reviews by competitors. Completely worthless as is the case with any review system that doesn’t allow validation.

           

           

           

           

          Report
          1. PeeBee

            “Do you even know that what the woman is claiming is completely true? Just because it’s not a fake review doesn’t mean it’s a fully factual account.”

            She’s in your neck of the woods – how about I put you in touch with her?  You can climb out of the barrel and have a nice Purple chat.

            I’m pretty darn sure she will convince you that her review is a fully factual account of her ‘experience’.

            Report
          2. Robert May

            I have an exam pass and certificate that says I am! I’ve still got and refer to the course reading list.

            If the public distrust estate agents  so much  why are passive intermediary internet listers so determined to aspire to be recognised as estate agents?

            If  passive intermediary internet listing is so much better than estate agency wouldn’t it be better to have that as a USP?  We are not estate agents, you can trust us!

             

            You can trust us to put your home on the internet listing sites

            You can trust us to chase you for  your listing fee whether your home sells or not.

             

            Sorry I’ve run out of  things the sector delivers,  what else can consumers  trust passive intermediary, estate agency  don’t wannabes to deliver for just over £1000 average?

            Report
  5. Curious george

    What??? Customers now publically having to voice their frustration in the media because it’s been suppressed on an independent review site???? This  doesn’t look good at all for Purplebricks.

    This is like a really bad smell for Purplebricks, it’s going to linger on and on and on……

    Report
  6. mattstephens38

    https://uk.trustpilot.com/users/598d77180000ff000aba4c21

    Report
    1. Property Pundit

      What happened to Chris Dale?

      Report
      1. PeeBee

        Nothing – just works in a DIFFERENT COUNTY.

        Report
  7. AnotherPlanet365

    support@trustpilot.com makes interesting reading

    it really is a guide on juggling, as we have witnessed it seems to be much more tailored towards how to make your company look good by carefully managing reviews

    personally I see very little that would allow me to retain much trust in the reviews that I am reading

    Report
X

You must be logged in to report this comment!

Comments are closed.

Thank you for signing up to our newsletter, we have sent you an email asking you to confirm your subscription. Additionally if you would like to create a free EYE account which allows you to comment on news stories and manage your email subscriptions please enter a password below.