Reviews policy
Reviews need evidence before they become public trust signals.
WashMerit does not treat reviews as generic directory decoration. Review submissions are held for moderation and must be tied to a real completed or paid job before they can help future customers compare providers.
What a review must include
- The reviewer must identify the provider, service, city or area, job date, and whether the work was completed or paid for.
- The submission must include documentary evidence or a matching WashMerit quote-request reference before it can move through moderation.
- The reviewer must confirm the review is genuine, unincentivised, and based on their own job experience.
- WashMerit can ask for more context before publishing if the job, provider, or evidence link is unclear.
Moderation questions
- Is the review tied to a real exterior-cleaning job rather than a sales enquiry, quote dispute, or unrelated complaint?
- Does the wording describe the job clearly enough to help future customers compare surface, method, access, and outcome context?
- Does the evidence support that the reviewer had a real customer relationship, without exposing private documents publicly?
- Is the content fair to publish, or should it be paused for a provider response, complaint review, or evidence follow-up?
Different from star-count directories
Reviews help comparison only when the limits stay visible.
A useful review should help a customer understand job context, not just add another rating badge. WashMerit keeps review feedback separate from verification status, provider-supplied proof, and job-specific due diligence.
A published review is customer feedback, not a WashMerit guarantee of future workmanship, price, availability, or damage-free results.
A strong star rating does not replace current insurance, RAMS, method, access, or same-surface proof checks for a new job.
Provider responses are allowed for context, but they cannot bury genuine criticism or pressure a customer to remove fair feedback.