Trustpilot Exposed: How a “Review Platform” Protects Scammers and Silences the Truth

-

 


Trustpilot promotes itself as the “universal symbol of trust.” In reality, it has become a playground for scammers — where fake five-star reviews thrive, while genuine warnings get silenced.

Even worse, their system allows defamatory attacks on people like me to remain online, unchallenged, even when they contain dangerous lies.

The RecoveryFin Example

Take RecoveryFin, one of hundreds of shady “crypto recovery services” that endlessly rebrand and pump out new websites targeting desperate scam victims. Their playbook is simple: buy a fresh domain, promise to recover stolen crypto, demand large upfront payments, then vanish.

When I investigated RecoveryFin.com, the domain was only a few months old. Despite that, it already had a one-star review posted on May 8, 2025 from a victim who had lost money. On August 9, 2025, I added my own one-star review — complete with evidence and receipts — to support that person.

Within hours, Trustpilot removed it, sending me this boilerplate:

“To ensure our community can trust the reviews they read on Trustpilot, we use automated detection technology and a team of experts to look for patterns of unusual behaviour… In this case, your review may have been flagged…”

They accused me of everything from using a VPN to “advertising content,” none of which applied. The review was genuine, but it never saw the light of day.

So I ran an experiment. I reposted the exact same review, word for word, but this time gave RecoveryFin five stars instead of one. Guess what? It went live instantly. No flags, no “unusual patterns,” no issues. That fraudulent five-star review sat online for over two weeks.

Only when the scam company itself intervened — requesting “documentation” like receipts or proof of service (which scammers, by definition, never provide) — did Trustpilot finally remove my five-star review.

Their excuse?

“Unfortunately, we found unusual patterns linked to your review or account. While our detection technology is usually spot on, we understand that it may get things wrong. That’s why we ask reviewers to send us documentation to help us verify their experiences…”

Here’s the contradiction:

  • One-star warning reviews = instantly blocked or deleted.
  • Five-star praise reviews = published and left online for weeks.

This proves the point: Trustpilot’s system doesn’t protect consumers — it protects paying clients. Scam companies are free to inflate their reputations with fake positives, while genuine critics are silenced with impossible demands for “documentation.”

And this loops right back to their business model:

If you pay Trustpilot, the rules bend in your favour. If you’re a consumer trying to warn others, you’ll be silenced unless you can provide receipts from criminals.

Trustpilot isn’t exposing scams like RecoveryFin. It’s enabling them.

What Trustpilot Does Allow: Defamation

While blocking my reviews, Trustpilot freely allows defamatory ones aimed at me — posted by people who have never used my services (because I don’t provide any for hire).

Take this one from Nicholas Boyles:

“On paper you would believe he is righteous but it’s all a front and projection. His highly unprofessional bully tactics border on harassment and terrorism. He will hack a businesses zoom account and speak under fake names… He will also extort for funds… He is one of the rudest most unprofessional entrepreneurs I have ever came across in my lifetime and I’ve been to all the shittest corners of the globe.”

After I replied, Boyles doubled down, accusing me of “hijacking” Zoom calls, “holding people hostage,” and even claimed that “legal action is underway” — all with zero evidence.

Let’s be clear: comparing me to a terrorist is not just defamatory — it’s disgusting. In Christchurch, New Zealand, we lost 51 lives in a terrorist attack at two mosques. For Trustpilot to allow this kind of smear to remain online while deleting factual scam warnings shows just how broken their system is.

Fake Reviews In, Genuine Reviews Out

Scam companies often flood Trustpilot with 200+ reviews in a single month, nearly all from brand-new accounts with no history. Many are one-line throwaways: “Great company! Fast service!” Yet they go live instantly, boosting star ratings.

Meanwhile, I’ve written over 70 Detailed Reviews on Trustpilot — yet my credibility counts for nothing. My fact-based one-star reviews are removed, while 10+ meaningless one-liners from sock-puppet accounts are allowed to sway the rating of a scam company.

How Trustpilot’s Flagging Process Really Works

Trustpilot says anyone can “flag” a review if they think it’s suspicious, defamatory, or not based on a genuine experience. In theory, this sounds fair. In practice, it’s a joke.

For example, you can request that Trustpilot asks a reviewer to provide evidence they’ve actually used your services. But here’s the crazy part: I don’t provide a service. I don’t sell coaching, consulting, or recovery services. I expose scams for free. So how can people claim to have had a “customer experience” with me when there was never a service to begin with?

Even when I go through the flagging process, the system just sends back another automated email. No human logic. No common sense. And almost always, the defamatory review stays online.

Trustpilot’s “Detection Software” = No Evidence Required

Trustpilot’s own email admits that once a review is flagged, they no longer ask the reviewer to provide documentation of their experience. Instead, they “run it through detection software” that looks at reviewer history and “other patterns,” and if the software doesn’t find a problem, the review stays online.

This is the core failure. No evidence is requested, no receipts are checked, and no human assesses motive or context. A brand-new account with one or two throwaway lines can survive simply because an algorithm didn’t spot a pattern — while evidence-backed warnings from experienced reviewers are blocked.

It also explains how scam pages rack up hundreds of five-star reviews from fresh accounts in a month: the system privileges pattern signals over proof.

For someone like me, who doesn’t sell a service and therefore can’t produce a “receipt,” this policy is absurd. It rewards unverifiable praise and protects defamatory attacks from people who have never used my services — because there are no services to use — while sidelining documented investigations.

Fighting Back With Their Own System

Here’s an idea: why don’t we flip the script? Trustpilot’s system rewards quantity, not quality. That’s why scam companies flood their pages with 200+ one-line reviews from new accounts in a single month.

So let’s play the investment game against them. If I’ve ever saved you or someone you know from losing money to a scam, Write me a Five-star Review. Not because I need Trustpilot for credibility — I don’t. I’ve already been featured in the New York Times, Bloomberg, ABC News, and Channel 9. But because it exposes just how broken their platform is.

If fake reviews can be used to boost scam companies, then genuine five-star reviews from real people I’ve helped can be used to expose the hypocrisy of Trustpilot’s system.

The Business Model Behind It: Pay Us or Be Punished

Trustpilot loves to market itself as the global leader in “trust.” But peel back the glossy sales pitch, and the business model is clear: Trustpilot is a reputation management machine designed to make money off businesses — not protect consumers.

Straight from their own website, here’s what they charge in New Zealand dollars:

  • Free Plan – A bare-bones option with 50 review invitations per month. Just enough to hook you in.
  • Plus Plan – NZ$209/month – 200 review invitations, widgets to cherry-pick positives, and basic branding.
  • Premium Plan – NZ$529/month – 500 invites, deeper analytics, 18 flashy widgets to showcase glowing reviews.
  • Advanced Plan – NZ$899/month – A staggering 5,000 invites per month, full customization, and industry insights.

That’s nearly NZ$11,000 a year just to buy control over how your company looks online.

And here’s the kicker:

  • The more you pay, the more control you get. Fake five-star reviews from freshly created accounts? No problem, they stick.
  • Negative reviews? Flagged, buried, or deleted — especially if the business is a paying client.
  • Consumers? Irrelevant. You don’t pay Trustpilot. You’re just the product that keeps their system ticking.

It’s Yelp-for-sale, a reputation laundromat where scammers can buy legitimacy and critics are quietly silenced.

The result?

  • Scam companies can flood the system with fake positives and walk away looking squeaky clean.
  • Honest reviewers, whistleblowers, and journalists like me are throttled by filters, bogus “detection software,” and endless rejection emails.

Trustpilot isn’t a watchdog. It’s a guard dog for whoever’s paying the highest subscription fee.

Trustpilot Is Part of the Problem

I’ve been featured in the New York Times, Bloomberg, ABC News, Channel 9 News in Australia, and across New Zealand media for my work exposing Ponzi schemes and scams. I even work with the FBI, Homeland Security, and the IRS to provide intelligence on international fraud networks.

And yet, on Trustpilot, I’m painted as a “terrorist” while scam companies rake in five-star reviews unchecked.

That tells you everything you need to know: Trustpilot isn’t protecting consumers. It’s protecting businesses — even when those businesses are scams.

Conclusion: Trustpilot Is Running Its Own Scam

Trustpilot claims to be about “trust,” but their system is rigged in favour of whoever pays them. They silence whistleblowers, enable fake reviews, and allow defamatory content against journalists exposing fraud.

That’s not a platform of integrity. That’s a business model built on reputation manipulation. In short: Trustpilot itself is a scam.

Bonus Section: How to Navigate Trustpilot’s Minefield

On Trustpilot, you can’t tell the full truth. If you write exactly what happened, your review risks being flagged, removed, or filtered out by bots. Meanwhile, scammers pump out one-liner five-star reviews that sail through.

So if you want your one-star warning to stick, here’s what I’ve learned:

Do’s (to get your warning review published):

  • Keep it factual but subtle (“I was not satisfied with the service” rather than “This is a scam”).
  • Focus on behaviours, not labels (“They requested upfront payments without delivering results” instead of “They stole my money”).
  • Use calm, plain language. Strong words trip the filters.
  • Add constructive advice (“Do your research before engaging”).

Don’ts (guaranteed to trigger removal):

  • Don’t use words like scam, fraud, criminal, or con.
  • Don’t make personal attacks — describe behaviour instead.
  • Don’t include links, emails, or phone numbers.
  • Don’t expect your review to survive if you write it exactly as you’d like — you need to dilute the truth.

The sad reality? The more honest and direct you are, the less chance your review has of staying online. That’s why scammers thrive: they know how to game the system.

Update: The Five-Star/One-Star Flip-Flop

Since first publishing this blog, the situation with my RecoveryFin review has taken an even stranger turn.

To recap:

  • My one-star review warning people about RecoveryFin was instantly blocked.
  • I reposted the exact same review with a five-star rating instead, and it went live immediately.
  • That five-star version stayed online for a week, then was removed.
  • I published this blog and replied directly to Trustpilot’s Content Integrity Team, providing them with the same evidence I’d already shared.

When I replied, I didn’t just send a quick email. I included the entire blog text in full, a direct link to the blog on my website, and I also posted a Snippet on my X account for the public to see. To make sure it got attention, I also CC’d legal@trustpilot.com.

Then came the twist:

Trustpilot emailed me back saying the “documentation” I had provided was sufficient, and as a result, they reactivated my five-star review. In other words, my original warning was only considered valid when framed as praise.

So, I pushed it further. I edited that reactivated review, switching it back to the One-star Rating it Deserved. Now the question is: will it stay online, or will their system bury it again?

This entire saga proves the absurdity of Trustpilot’s process. A genuine review supported by evidence was rejected outright as a one-star, but accepted without issue as a five-star. Only after publishing a blog, posting publicly on Twitter, and CC’ing their legal department did Trustpilot allow it back — and even then, only as a positive rating.

It’s reputation management theatre, not consumer protection.

And Another Twist…

After publishing this blog, I decided to test the system further — this time by leaving a One-star Review of Trustpilot itself. To my surprise, it was approved and published without issue.

Here’s the review I left on their own page:

Title: Reviews Don’t Work the Same for Everyone

I tested Trustpilot’s system by reviewing a so-called crypto recovery service. My one-star review with evidence never made it online. Out of curiosity, I reposted the exact same review — word for word — but gave the company five stars instead. That version went live instantly and stayed online for over two weeks.

This shows how the platform’s filters punish genuine warnings but allow glowing praise for questionable businesses. Consumers think they’re seeing balanced feedback, but the system is tilted. If you can only post positive reviews without them being challenged, how much trust can anyone really have in “Trust”pilot?

That review was allowed through immediately — which only reinforces the point of this blog: Trustpilot applies different rules depending on who is being reviewed, and whether the outcome benefits their business model.

Disclaimer: How This Investigation Was Conducted

This investigation relies entirely on OSINT — Open Source Intelligence — meaning every claim made here is based on publicly available records, archived web pages, corporate filings, domain data, social media activity, and open blockchain transactions. No private data, hacking, or unlawful access methods were used. OSINT is a powerful and ethical tool for exposing scams without violating privacy laws or overstepping legal boundaries.

About the Author

Danny de Hek, also known as The Crypto Ponzi Scheme Avenger, is a New Zealand-based investigative journalist specializing in exposing crypto fraud, Ponzi schemes, and MLM scams. His work has been featured by Bloomberg, The New York Times, The Guardian Australia, ABC News Australia, and other international outlets.

Stop losing your future to financial parasites. Subscribe. Expose. Protect.

My work exposing crypto fraud has been featured in:


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Origin LGNS Exposed: Crypto Ponzi Masquerading as DeFi with 3X Daily Profits and Cult Hype

-
Image
If you stumbled across a crypto project called ORIGIN or  OriginWorld.org , this blog is your warning label. You might’ve seen their slick graphics, cultish promises of “financial freedom,” and ridiculous claims like  7,909% APY  or a  “distributed encrypted civilization.”  It all sounds impressive until you scratch the surface and realise you’re looking at a  tech-wrapped Ponzi cult. But first, here’s how it landed on my radar. I received a  WhatsApp message  from a guy named  Don  who I thought wanted a professional review on an investment platform. Turns out, he was actually  trying to recruit me . He sent me a sign-up link for something called  Origin LGNS . He claimed it paid  0.3% every 8 hours , and that he had made  $100 in two weeks  from a  $800 initial investment , which he later topped up to  $1,000 . He said he hadn’t withdrawn any money yet because the platform was paying so well, so he ju...
Read more

BitNest’s Smart Contract Audit: Why a Clean Code Check Doesn’t Erase a Ponzi Business Model

-
Image
  Following the publication of our  Original Blog  and  YouTube  exposé on  BitNest  and Mellion Coin, we received a comment questioning whether we had properly reviewed BitNest’s smart contracts and its CertiK audit. It’s a fair question. And as always, we believe in full transparency. In this follow-up blog, we’re diving deep into the  technical side  — unpacking exactly what the CertiK audit says, what it doesn’t say, and why BitNest’s core business model remains fundamentally fraudulent despite the presence of “audited” code. What a Smart Contract Actually Means First, let’s clear up a major misconception: A  smart contract  is simply a computer program that says, “IF X happens, THEN Y automatically happens.” That’s it. It doesn’t guarantee that the  thing it’s doing  is ethical, profitable, or sustainable. A smart contract can execute a perfectly coded Ponzi scheme just as easily as it can execute a legitimate DeFi pr...
Read more

E1U Life: A Ponzi Scheme Disguised as AI Innovation – And Look Who’s Behind It!

-
Image
  Introduction: The Scam Playbook Never Changes If you’ve followed my work as  The Crypto Ponzi Scheme Avenger , you already know that  scammers never quit.  They just slap a  new name  on an  old scheme , sprinkle in some  AI buzzwords , and start the  recruitment cycle all over again. Enter  E1U Life , the latest  Ponzi disguised as an “AI-powered” business opportunity.  It’s being pushed by  notorious scammers  Marshonda Henderson  and  Shadrack Sure —two people who have a history of promoting fraudulent get-rich-quick schemes. And now, thanks to  new information from  BehindMLM , we also know that  David Golden  is running the show—a guy with a  direct link to serial fraudster  Dwayne Golden , who  just pled guilty to wire fraud and money laundering. With  this lineup of criminals behind it,  I don’t even have to investigate  whether E1U Life is a scam. ...
Read more