allAgents is continuing to demand an independent audit of both its and Trustpilot’s reviews of Purplebricks as the battle between the two continues to be waged.
allAgents has been involved in a long-running dispute with Purplebricks over the validity of the large number of negative reviews posted on the allAgents site, with Purplebricks saying that some are fake and others cannot be verified.
The battle has now stepped up after allAgents said that a Facebook user posted: “Don’t. Awful. Take your money sell (sic) or no sale and then you’ll never hear from them. I’ve just removed my property with them.”
An area manager for Purplebricks then apparently commented: “Over 40,000 positive reviews on Trustpilot verified users of Purplebricks. allAgents is an unregulated site where anyone and everyone (including the competition) can post untrue reviews.”
Yesterday allAgents’ Martin McKenzie said: “Enough is enough. First Purplebricks’ lawyers send us threatening letters, now their own staff are trolling Facebook users to spread misinformation about us.
“All of our Purplebricks reviews – both positive and negative – are verified. I’m not convinced Trustpilot can say the same. What’s needed is an independent audit of both our reviews and Trustpilot’s. We’re very happy to allow that – the question is, are they?
“With such a wide disparity in ratings, it’s time consumers knew which review website they’re able to really trust.”
Purplebricks declined to comment.
‘Purplebricks declined to comment.’ – Nice one Ros, that really made my day!
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
PIE – A more interesting story;
CFO of Purplebricks, Matthew Farrow cashes in on shares and leaves company.
That is two CFO’s in the space of 4 years.
JPS
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
As at 0907 this morning, of the 100 most recently posted Trustpilot reviews only TWELVE state “Verified order”.
TWO of the rest state “Reviewer contacted” – where PB are disputing the validity of the review.
BOTH of those are ONE-STAR reviews.
#Funny_That…
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
I will bet that no 5* review has ever had “Reviewer contacted” – would be great if PB were transparent and disclosed the stats !
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Unfortunately I have to advise that your stake would be lose, L_L.
They DO ‘report’ a few 5-star reviews. I’ve even seen them remove a few of the few.
Whether they reinstate those ‘#NUKED’ reviews after a short absence is, of course, another matter of question…
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
UPDATE AS OF 10.37
Since the 09.07 check, SEVEN of the previously unchecked reviews have been marked “Reviewer contacted”
It’s taken them up to 40 hours to do that.
By comparison – the 1-star reviews generally get this response pasted on them within minutes.
As both of those had been “Reviewer contacted” already when I posted, this shows that PB had specifically REVISITED the site to carry out these new ‘queries’ AFTER my post.
#Funny_That…
The power of EYE!
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
It is time the Government pulled the plug on review sites? The intended purpose of reviews is now overshadowed to the point that no-one trusts them anymore and companies are being accused of rigging reviews that don’t show them in a good light or rigging how the reviews is posted for commercial gain. Considering there is so much consumer protection, review sites are “unregulated wild west” and no longer fit for purpose. Any company found to be rigging or misrepresenting reviews in any shape or form, should be prosecuted.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Google every time for me!
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
>“With such a wide disparity in ratings, it’s time consumers knew which review website they’re able to really trust.”
>Purplebricks declined to comment.
Surely PB have already commented on at least some of the points being made?
How many reviews do AllAgents have? Perhaps they’ve had a deluge recently but it was a tiny, tiny percentage of customers the last time I looked.
Is the fact that it is such a small number and that PB invite their customers to use Trustpilot not a huge factor in regards to whether AllAgents’ siite can be considered as representative? I’m sure PB have made this point before or at least have referred to the tiny percentage of customers who have left reviews with AllAgents.
http://www.propertyindustryeye.com/about-us/
“Property Industry Eye is dedicated to the publication of independent, unbiased, factual and accurate news reporting of matters of interest to those working in the United Kingdom property market and beyond”
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
As much as i dislike any review site, AllAgents is the leading review site for estate agents.
And to be fair to them, the comments left by the public cannot be deleted.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Oh, dear. ducky’s off on one again… and yet again questioning the impartiality and independence of EYE.
Interestingly, the poster by the name of ‘John Lawson’ who often makes identical comments down the other pub to those quacked by the duckster here on EYE hasn’t shown his beak – I mean face – over there today and hasn’t raised the same feeble points put forward by our fowl friend on a pretty identical article.
Maybe, of course, that poster isn’t as ‘sensitive’ to the number of PB-centric articles on EAT as is ducky.
Maybe that person isn’t as numbskulled as to think that reporting of stuff such as this on a platform that those in the property industry can rely on to keep us informed of what’s what and where in said property industry is in some way twisting the facts as our wee waterproof Wandering Whistler.
Maybe we will never know.
But what ducky AND this Lawson numpty want to wake up and realise is that their quacks don’t echo. It’s all b0110cks blarted out – then forgotten.
Only the truth lingers, reverberating again and again for all to take notice of.
Truth like:
Marks & Spencer. Perhaps the best-known retailer in the UK. £10.6bn turnover in 2017. 32million customers.
One thousand one hundred and seventy-two Trustpilot reviews – in eight years. Two thirds of those are no more than two star ratings.
BMW (UK). The Ultimate Driving Machine. Thousands of the bu99ers on UK roads.
Forty nine Trustpilot reviews. In 18 months. Three quarters of them two or less stars.
Trustpilot.
37316 reviews.
Almost 25% are strongly negative. OF A REVIEW SITE! OF THEMSELVES!
Truth hurts, ducky.
You will let Mr Lawson know… won’t you? I would myself – but I don’t post on EAT. Neither do most of those that post on EYE.
#Funny, That…
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Slow hand clap, a pithy point well made.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Trustpilot employs about 500 people and roughly 500,000 new reviews are posted each month. Can someone works out the maths of how long it will take a Trustpilot employee to check these reviews? Oh yea! PB are a very small dot in Europe and they would have us believe they get more reviews than any other major player and are perfect. TrustPilot are woefully inadequate in trust.
Quote TrustPilot (note the last sentence): You can write a review on Trustpilot for each experience you have had with a company. This means that if you have had multiple experiences, you can write multiple reviews. To avoid flooding, you can write a maximum of one review in each 24-hour period, with the only exception to this being if you have been invited by the company to review them multiple times.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
Those are the facts of it which we instinctively know in the abstract, something quite different though to see it written like that, if the verbatim is really
.”To avoid flooding, you can write a maximum of one review in each 24-hour period, with the only exception to this being if you have been invited by the company to review them multiple times. ”
then seriously, what are the actual benefits of these sites other than commercially for their owners?
Google said don’t be evil, Facebook only wanted to connect the world, lastminuite/myspace darlings and then dead, the first two under suspicion, I think personal contact and skin in game wins in the digital age, we just need to work out the best way
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register
There is a way for firms to now protect themselves from unfair reviews. You can read more about my company at http://www.riskeye.com.
Basically Facebook, Google and Twitter will never have the resources necessary to police their platforms – so we do the police work on behalf of our clients.
You must be logged in to like or dislike this comments.
Click to login
Don't have an account? Click here to register