What changed
From 6 April 2025, specified practices involving fake reviews and concealed incentivised reviews became expressly banned under the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024. The rules also place responsibilities on traders that publish reviews or review information.
Reviews influence where people eat, what they buy, which tradesperson they contact and whether they trust an unfamiliar business. A high score can therefore be commercially valuable, even when the customer never reads the individual comments.
The legal changes are important, but they do not turn every review into a verified fact. A platform’s duty is to take reasonable and proportionate steps. Consumers should still examine how the rating was produced and what the reviews actually say.
What the banned practices cover
The CMA guidance addresses conduct such as
- submitting or commissioning a review that falsely claims to reflect a genuine experience;
- offering an incentive for a review without ensuring the incentive is properly disclosed;
- publishing review information that creates a false or misleading impression;
- suppressing genuine negative reviews in a way that distorts the picture; and
- publishing reviews without taking reasonable and proportionate steps to prevent and remove prohibited material.
The rules apply to review information as well as the written review itself. Star ratings, rankings, summaries and claims about the number of reviews can therefore matter.
An incentivised review is not automatically worthless
A customer may receive a free product, discount, loyalty points or entry into a prize draw in return for providing a review. The central issue is transparency and authenticity. The incentive should be disclosed clearly, and the reviewer must remain free to express a genuine view.
“Verified purchase” has limits
A verified-purchase marker may indicate that an account completed a transaction. It does not prove that the review is independent, that the product was used as described or that no incentive was offered.
Why an overall score can mislead
Questions worth asking
- Are all reviews included in the displayed score?
- Are reviews about the exact product, or have several versions been merged?
- Does the score include imported reviews from another website or market?
- Are recent reviews materially worse than the historic average?
- Does the platform explain how it identifies, removes and appeals suspected fakes?
- Are incentives, sampling programmes or business relationships clearly labelled?
A score can be mathematically accurate while still lacking useful context. A product redesigned last month may inherit thousands of reviews for an older version. A business may improve or deteriorate while its historic rating changes only slowly.
Patterns that deserve a closer look
Possible warning signs
- a sudden burst of reviews using similar language;
- large numbers of vague five-star comments that do not identify a feature or experience;
- reviewer accounts repeatedly rating unrelated products in the same style;
- comments that discuss packaging or delivery but not the product being rated;
- repeated claims that sound copied from marketing material; and
- a sharp difference between reviews on the seller’s own page and independent sources.
None of these signs proves that a review is fake. Genuine reviews can be short, enthusiastic or posted in clusters after a business asks customers for feedback. The point is to avoid treating a suspicious pattern as reliable evidence.
Use reviews as one source, not the whole decision
A more reliable check
Read a sample of recent positive, neutral and negative reviews.
Look for specific descriptions of use, limitations and customer-service responses.
Check whether the reviewer received an incentive or free product.
Compare the seller’s claims with independent specifications and official safety information.
Confirm the returns policy, contractual seller and available payment protection.
Save important claims that influence the purchase.
If you suspect manipulation
Use the reporting function provided by the review platform and identify the specific concern. A review being negative, positive or poorly written is not itself proof of a legal breach.
Where a review or rating materially influenced a purchase and the product was misrepresented, preserve the advert, review information and transaction record. The available consumer remedy will depend on the contract and the false or misleading information involved.
Wider or repeated practices can also be reported to the Citizens Advice consumer service, which passes appropriate intelligence to Trading Standards, or to the CMA through its consumer and competition reporting routes.
The ConsumerWise verdict
The new law raises the standard expected of businesses and platforms. It does not make a star rating self-proving. Consumers should be able to see whether a review was incentivised, understand how ratings are assembled and trust that publishers have credible systems to prevent and remove fakes.
A useful review tells you something testable. A useful platform tells you how that review reached the page.
Official sources and further guidance
- CMA: fake reviews guidanceDetailed guidance on banned practices and the duties of review publishers.
- CMA: short guide for review publishersA concise summary of compliance expectations.
- CMA: guidance for online review sitesPractical guidance on policies, checks and presentation.
- Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024, Schedule 20The statutory list of banned commercial practices.
