Who may review
A homeowner may review a trade business only when the review is linked to a ServiceLink job that the system records as assigned and completed by that business. One review is permitted per completed job unless a published correction process allows an update.
“Verified review” means only that the platform linked the review to that completed ServiceLink job. It does not mean ServiceLink inspected the work, confirmed every factual claim or endorsed the opinion.
What a review should contain
- the reviewer's genuine first-hand experience;
- relevant, specific and honestly held feedback;
- factual statements the reviewer reasonably believes are accurate;
- no unnecessary personal information, access details or private communications;
- no threats, harassment, discrimination, extortion or illegal material.
Prohibited review conduct
- self-reviews or reviews by the business, its staff, family, contractors or agents presented as independent customers;
- competitor reviews or coordinated rating manipulation;
- reviews by someone who did not experience the work;
- payment, discount or another incentive conditioned on a positive review, rating or particular wording;
- undisclosed incentives even where no positive sentiment is required;
- a trade business drafting the customer's review or choosing a rating that is published by default;
- threats to post or remove a review to obtain money, free work or another advantage unrelated to a genuine remedy.
Publication and rating display
Published aggregate ratings must show the number of reviews on which they are based. ServiceLink should explain the calculation, rounding, time period and whether older reviews are weighted. A paid subscription, fee or advertising relationship must not secretly improve a rating or review position.
Review ordering controls must be labelled. If relevance or “recommended” sorting uses commercial or personalised factors, material factors must be disclosed clearly.
Moderation process
- Automated or manual signals may flag a review, but an adverse decision should not rely blindly on automation.
- A moderator checks eligibility, authenticity signals, relevance, policy breaches and any specific legal complaint.
- ServiceLink may temporarily limit access where reasonably necessary to address a serious safety, illegality or rights risk.
- The reviewer and affected business may be asked for job-linked evidence. Irrelevant sensitive information should not be requested.
- The outcome records the policy ground, action, decision-maker and appeal route. Genuine criticism is not removed merely because it is negative or disputed.
Where only a separable part breaches policy, ServiceLink may ask the reviewer to revise it. We will not rewrite a review in a way that changes the reviewer's meaning or sentiment.
Business response and correction
The reviewed business should have a clearly labelled right of reply. A response must follow the same content standards and must not expose private customer information. A user may correct an error, but the platform should keep an internal audit record and label material edits where needed to avoid misleading readers.
Reports, legal complaints and appeals
A report must identify the review, the claimed problem and supporting facts. “This is unfair” is not enough by itself; a complainant should identify, for example, a factual error, fake-review connection, confidential information, threat, defamation allegation or policy clause.
Defamation, copyright and other rights complaints follow the Copyright and Content Complaints Policy. Moderation outcomes can be reviewed through the Complaints and Disputes Policy.