Agency review site raterAgent has found that 17% – just over one in six – of all attempted reviews are efforts by agents, or someone they know, to falsify their own or a competitor’s reputation.
Mal McCallion, raterAgent co-founder and CEO, said: “It’s one of the reasons why we welcome the investigation by the Competition and Markets Authority into review websites.
“We created raterAgent at the beginning of 2015 to be the place of safety for agents wanting to benefit from independent verification of their genuine customer reviews, untarnished by the rampant cheating that just isn’t caught elsewhere.”
Last week, the CMA announced its investigation of online review sites, saying it had found instances of businesses writing fake reviews themselves, and firms writing or commissioning fake negative reviews to undermine rivals.
McCallion said that raterAgent’s latest analysis lays bare the intentions of lying agents.
It found that 78% of fake submissions are five-star reviews given of themselves by estate and letting agents – or their partners, friends, family or other representatives.
The remainder are what raterAgent calls ‘one-star bombs’ hurled at a competitor.
McCallion said: “Faking reviews, whether to improve your own online standing or damage someone else’s, is not just a disreputable way to behave – it’s illegal in many instances and we’re volunteering to help the CMA and anyone else that wants to stamp out these practices.
“We are meticulously building evidence against repeat offenders and there will come a time, I’m sure, when we will have to ‘name and shame’ which agents are continually flouting our rules regarding fake reviews.”
The site uses a ‘triple-lock’ check for fraudulent reviews.
A unique algorithm processes every single review against 13 known cheating metrics, including (but not limited to) IP addresses, common fake phrase analysis and the agent’s cheating history, before giving each a grade out of 100 as to how likely it is to be fake.
Then a moderator team goes through each meticulously, searching social media and electoral roll data – amongst many other factors that raterAgent keeps intentionally secret – for evidence of the reviewer’s existence and any relationship to the reviewee.
The third check is to write to the reviewer of any that are believed to be fake, asking them to prove that they have been involved with the agent.
Failure in this results in the submission being marked as ‘fake’ and not allowed on to the site.
McCallion said: “We’re building a uniquely trustworthy resource for agents to prove the quality of their service.
“Everyone knows that there are sites out there that positively encourage fake reviewing, mainly for commercial considerations. raterAgent champions trustworthiness because, in the end, that will bring genuine sellers and landlords to the site and enable the best quality agents to win new clients at a stronger fee.”
Comments (18)
From a business perspective a rating agency is a dangerous game for any business to get involved with. The reasons are clearly stated by others above. As for “allowing ANYONE to say ANYTHING while making a living out of it themselves” is this not correct for all the rating agencies who push the idea that good reviews, get you business but they can also fatally flaw you. I’m not on any and my business is extremely successful. I’m not on Facebook or Twitter for the same reasons and some accuse me of being old fashioned and yet I don’t loose business or get slimed by trolls. I have a business to run and our reputation is untarnished, while my sister-in-law (another agency) spends most of her day trying to defend herself. Why make yourself a target?
Hi Woodentop – hope you’re (selling) well!
You say “I’m not on any and my business is extremely successful.” This may be a stoopid kweshtyun – but have you actually checked? Many companies I know are listed – and have been “rated” – and didn’t even know about it! I check weekly in case they have discovered my small patch of turf – so far this lot for one don’t think there is an Agent within SEVEN MILES of by branch postcode!
The website claims “raterAgent has information on every estate agent branch in the UK”. Of course it is complete and utter MDT – but until there is a site for us to rate rating sites there is nothing we can do to highlight the false claims and inaccuracies that are the norm of this parasitic industry.
Its the arrival of Agency blackmail,an example is a disgruntled tenant who has part of deposit held for say cleaning or damage, will then post a negative review and the price for removal is the return of the full deposit.
Believe me its already happening.
Believe me its aleady happening
Headache – you make a very valid point – and whilst it has been raised many times before on various threads it is right to raise it again here.
Of course, with most of these ‘rating’ sites the Agent has an opportunity to defend themselves and ask for a bogus rating to be removed or investigated, but the reality is that once it is posted the potential for damage could have immediate effect.
I honestly wonder if the people who start these websites actually a) realise or b) give a shizzle about the consequence to other businesses or individuals of allowing ANYONE to say ANYTHING while making a living out of it themselves.
I fail to come up with a single publishable word to describe my opinion of the concept or those who are milking it for whatever it is possibly worth.
17% is an actual figure or assumption? Either way it is likely there are still reviews they can’t say are not false, so will that number not be higher? At the end of the day this is a business model that has a flaw … not everything you read is true!
Hi Woodentop. 17% is the actual figure of reviews we receive and deem to be fake, these are not published on our site.
Obviously we cannot guarantee 100% of all fake reviews will be found, that’s just plain impossible. But we are certainly trying extremely hard to find as many as possible.
Feel free to email me (jordan@rateragent.co.uk) if you have any more questions.
Jordan – raterAgent
Mr Mann – perhaps you need to explain to the EYE audience what RaterAgent actually does to verify potential fake ratings, the same way you have on that other website.
Hi PeeBee. First reviews get put through our algorithm which currently checks 13 different points – from things like IP address to commonly used words in fake reviews. This then throws out a score of how fake this is likely to be, it then goes over to our team of moderators who manually check every single review – on things like social media and electoral roll data. If they deem it to be fake we will contact the reviewer telling them the review we received is fake and giving them a last chance to prove it’s genuine, if they don’t provide reasonable evidence that the review is genuine then it will not be published.
Repeat offenders to this will be publicly named and shamed with a notice on their page.
I hope you understand we cannot let you know of every check we do, because then faking reviews would be easy again.
Jordan – raterAgent
“Repeat offenders to this will be publicly named and shamed with a notice on their page.”
That’s NOT what your MD/CEO/InsertPoshTitleOfTheWeek says above, Mr Mann – suggest you check with him before making such statements!
Hi PeeBee, he states that we do indeed name and shame. His post might have been read wrong – “they run the risk of considerable embarrassment – and potential loss of business – if we were to ‘name and shame’ them.”
Meaning if it reaches that stage (of naming and shaming) they would run the risk of potential embarrassment – and also due to the naming and shaming notice, a potential loss of business.
I can assure you we do not take lightly to cheaters, this is the last resort but we do indeed name and shame those who try to game our system multiple times.
Jordan – raterAgent
“…he states that we do indeed name and shame.”
Example, please.
Direct me to ONE such company page on your website.
…anytime you’re ready, Mr Mann.
Interestingly,, EYE ran an article from this company in March, entitled
“One in every eight estate agency reviews is a fake”
Thirty percent increase in only three months – looks like people are catching on to how easy it is to skew the system…
Hi PeeBee – you’re right that the volume of attempts to game raterAgent’s system has increased massively. However, we’re still not putting them up on site.
I’d argue strongly that the increase in attempts is because agents are seeing more value in a raterAgent review now than they were 3 months ago, so it’s worth their while giving it a shot. What I hope they’ll now do is think twice as their reviews don’t make it up onto our site, we know who they are and they run the risk of considerable embarrassment – and potential loss of business – if we were to ‘name and shame’ them.
There’s no guarantees that agents will heed this but I live in hope that we’ll get back down towards single figure % fakers.
Perhaps just as likely is that the fakers try and get even more sophisticated in their attempts but we’re also prepared for that …
Thanks again and do email me on mal@rateragent.co.uk if you’ve any specific questions about what we’re doing at raterAgent. Cheers, Mal
“What I hope they’ll now do is think twice as their reviews don’t make it up onto our site, we know who they are and they run the risk of considerable embarrassment – and potential loss of business – if we were to ‘name and shame’ them.”
Three months ago – as seen above – you stated you WOULD ‘name and shame them.
Why the U-turn? A cheat is a cheat – they can’t sue you for outing the truth.
“…and do email me on mal@rateragent.co.uk if you’ve any specific questions about what we’re doing at raterAgent.”
Thanks – but I’ll just keep asking my questions here on EYE if that’s okay with you.
If I want to know, I suggest others will probably want to know also.
This way you’re answering to everyone. Fair, transparent – and not open to abuse. Isn’t that right?
One in six are FAKE?
I would have said more like one in six are REAL…
“McCallion said: “We’re building a uniquely trustworthy resource for agents to prove the quality of their service.”
No, Mr McCallion – you are NOT “building it”. You have said from DAY ONE that IT IS BUILT – as per your website:
“raterAgent.co.uk is the UK’s most trustworthy, dedicated estate or letting agent reiew site for getting proof of the quality of an agent’s service.”
Above, Mr McCallion states “We are meticulously building evidence against repeat offenders and there will come a time, I’m sure, when we will have to ‘name and shame’ which agents are continually flouting our rules regarding fake reviews.”
Here’s a reminder of a ‘conversation’ that took place here on EYE when the site went ‘live’ back in April between little me and Mr McCallion –
“PeeBee said:
April 24, 2015 at 1:53 pm
“The site says it has checked every single one of hundreds of reviews and “caught out dozens of agents trying to inflate their own credibility or ruin that of a competitor”.”
So… NAME AND SHAME, then!
Reply ↓
Dislike(0)Like (3)
Malsaid:
April 24, 2015 at 4:10 pm
Hi PeeBee – they’re on a final warning and if they carry on then we will! Cheers, Mal
Reply ↓
Dislike(2)Like (0)
PeeBeesaid:
April 24, 2015 at 5:13 pm
Oh, well… that’s gonna sort them out without a shadow of a doubt!
On your website, you state: “Choosing the wrong agent can mean you lose thousands of pounds in low valuations or poor negotiations”
And tapping a lying, cheating one on the wristypoo and telling them not to get caught again is going to make them the ‘right’ Agent HOW, exactly, Mr McCallion…?”
Don’t just ‘Dislike’ – grow a pair and say WHY you don’t like what is posted.