5,0/5 Google · 167 reviewsWe do not check reviews of us on other platforms that we do not quote verbatim for authenticity. They may therefore also come from people who are not our clients. The rules of the respective platform apply. Reviews that we quote verbatim on our website, by contrast, have been checked for authenticity within the meaning of Section 5b(3) UWG (German Act against Unfair Competition): we compared the reviewers’ names with our client register. We also asked the respective platform to check the reviews for authenticity.Period: October 2016 to date · As of: 28 October 2026
Have a review removed
An unfair review does not have to stay online.
We review negative reviews on Google, Kununu, Jameda and Trustpilot as lawyers. Then we file a reasoned complaint with the platform and follow up.
Please paste the link first.
The first contact is free of charge. We will tell you explicitly before any costs arise.
Response on working days within 24 hoursOr start with the free check (in German)
Stand: 23.10.2026
Never been there, but still: an absolute disaster. Stay away from this company!
Point of attack: no customer contact apparent
- 1Secure the reviewCore statement and evidence
- 2Check the evidenceReasoned, to the platform
- 3File the complaintThe platform reviews and decides
Schematic illustration. Whether a review is removed is decided by the platform after its review.
We challenge reviews on
- kununu
- jameda
- Trustpilot
What should you do right away?
- Do not reply publicly to the review in haste. An emotional reply can confirm the allegation or create new points of attack.
- Secure the review with a screenshot, link, date and profile name before it is changed.
Key points in brief
- At ITMR, we secure a negative online review, examine its core statement and the evidence and file a targeted complaint with the platform.
- A review can be removed if it is unlawful or violates platform rules.
- Typical points of attack are a lack of customer contact, false statements of fact, insults, conflicts of interest or spam.
- Your contact is Jean Paul Bohne and his team. He is a Fachanwalt (certified specialist lawyer) for IT law and for copyright and media law. Response on working days within 24 hours.
- DSA
- Digital Services Act. EU regulation with obligations for online platforms and intermediary services.
The problem
What to do when a review costs you enquiries?
A negative review becomes a business issue when it stays visible and affects trust, enquiries, applications or deals. Then you need a solid legal or platform-related point of attack.
Not every bad review is unlawful. But many cases are challenged too weakly.
Platforms do not delete a review because it seems unfair. We work out the core statement: opinion, statement of fact, missing contact, insult, data protection, identity misuse, conflict of interest, spam or policy violation. The platform must be able to recognise the violation and handle it in a documented way.
- Platforms
- Google, Google Maps, Kununu, Jameda, Trustpilot, industry portals, employer profiles
- Typical point of attack
- the lack of actual contact
- Legal framework
- Law on statements, corporate personality rights, DSA, platform policies
- For whom
- Companies, practices, law firms, employers and brands
Remove, reply or escalate?
Have it removed
In the case of missing contact, false facts, insults, identity misuse, spam, conflicts of interest, off-topic content or a clear platform violation.
Coordinate a reply
If the review stays but a reaction stabilises trust. Customer data and internal matters remain protected.
Escalate
If platforms do not respond, reject schematically or a wave of reviews appears coordinated.
Practical yardstick. What counts is the step that removes the review, limits the damage and does not weaken your position.
Serious review instead of removal promises
We do not promise blanket removal. We examine how challengeable the review is, the evidence and the realistic route and then discuss the next steps, without unnecessary disclosure of sensitive internal matters.
How it works
How does the review work in three steps?
After your enquiry, we get back to you on working days within 24 hours and tell you which next step makes sense.
01
Secure the review
We secure the URL, screenshot, date, star rating, platform, profile name, location reference and previous platform reactions. Then we break the review down into opinion, statement of fact, assessment, allegation, context and possible infringement.
First response on working days within 24 hours
- Opinionpermissible?
- Statement of factrefutable
- Customer contactnone
02
Check the evidence
We check customer contact, orders, appointments, invoices, CRM, emails, bookings, location data or internal processes for their reliability.
03
File the complaint
We give reasons for the complaint so that the platform can recognise, review and handle the violation in a documented way. If it refuses, we follow up. Depending on the case, this is followed by a platform complaint, sharper legal reasoning or further escalation towards the platform. The platform reviews and decides. If the review stays, we discuss sharper reasoning or a reply strategy with you.
Depends on the platform and procedure
- To
- Platform, legal department
- Reason
- Infringement, no contact
- Enclosures
- Screenshot, evidence, reasoning
How long does it take? We complete most steps within a few working days. How fast it goes depends on the scope and on your feedback. Do you have a fixed date, such as a deadline? Tell us right away in your enquiry and we will plan for it.
Scope of services
What does the package include?
Service package: remove a review
Securing and documentation
We secure the URL, screenshot, date, star rating, platform, profile name, location reference and previous platform reactions in an orderly and complete way.
Legal review of the core statement
We separate opinion, statement of fact, assessment, allegation and context and identify the solid point of attack.
Reasoned platform complaint
We structure the complaint so that the platform can recognise, review and handle the violation in a documented way.
Sharper legal reasoning
If the platform refuses or only replies schematically, we follow up with precise legal reasoning.
Coordinated reply strategy
Where removal is not the best first step, we coordinate a public reply without disclosing customer data or lines of defence.
- Platforms
- Google and Google Maps, Kununu, Jameda, Trustpilot, industry portals
- First response
- on working days within 24 hours
- Initial contact
- free of charge, to clarify the topic, responsibility and next step
- Costs
- We inform you explicitly in advance. Only then do you decide.
- Handled by
- Fachanwälte (certified specialist lawyers) for IT law and a Fachanwalt for copyright and media law
- Locations
- Düsseldorf and Hamburg, active throughout Germany
- Not included in the package
- Action against the reviewer personally. This is a separate service, on request and as needed.
Who provides what and who decides
What you provide
- Link to the review or a short description
- Screenshot, if available
- Information on possible customer, patient, client or business contact
- Internal evidence and previous platform replies
What we do
- Secure the review and examine its core statement
- Identify the point of attack and give reasons for the complaint
- Follow up with the platform
- Prepare further steps and coordinate them with you
What you decide
- Whether we file a complaint, reply or escalate
- Whether a broader reputation strategy makes sense
How does the engagement work?
- 1
Initial assessment
We review your information and tell you whether the package fits or another route makes more sense.
- 2
Offer for the package
If the package fits, you receive an offer for the review, preservation of evidence and a reasoned complaint. We only start after your approval.
- 3
Court action separately
A lawsuit against the platform or author and representation in court are not part of the package. We agree these steps separately.
Platforms
Which platforms do we cover?
The legal review remains the core. Even so, review cases differ significantly from platform to platform. Google reviews follow different practical routines than employer reviews, doctor profiles, shop reviews or industry portals.
Have a Google review removed
Google, Maps, Business Profile
On Google, what counts are the review policies, actual contact, reference to the location and profile, suspected spam and conflicts of interest. We check whether the review describes a genuine experience or merely places an attack.
kununu
Have a Kununu review removed
Kununu, employer profiles, recruiting
In our cases, Kununu reviews often concern anonymity, former employees, internal processes, application procedures and allegations about management. We draw the line between permissible criticism and false statements of fact.
If you want to identify the author, you will find the route via Section 21 TDDDG in our article (in German) Anonymous statements on the internet: identifying the author.
jameda
Have a Jameda review removed
Jameda, practice and professional profiles
On practice, law firm or professional profiles, reviews have a particularly strong effect on trust and initial contact. Sensitive issues are false allegations of treatment errors, questions of discretion, patient data and specific descriptions of processes.
Trustpilot
Have a Trustpilot review removed
Trustpilot, shops, platform trading
With shop, product or platform reviews, we precisely compare the contract, delivery, payment, customer service, withdrawal, complaints and actual customer contact with the review.
Typical cases
When is a legal review worthwhile?
Google review without contact
The name matches no transaction. The description stays generic or the review looks like an attack without any actual customer, patient, client or business experience.
Visible false allegation
The review alleges specific mistakes, prices, processes, statements or events. These can be refuted or clearly put into perspective using internal records.
Kununu or employer review
An allegation concerns HR, management, pay, dismissal, working atmosphere or recruiting. It appears where the employer image and applications are affected.
Jameda, practice or industry profile
The review hits a profile where trust, professional reputation and local search come together in a particularly sensitive way.
Wave of reviews or conspicuous pattern
Several reviews appear within a short time, are linguistically similar or concern different locations, profiles or platforms at once.
The platform has refused
Your own report was not accepted, was answered only schematically or was not reviewed on the basis of the actual legal problem.
Legal basis
What does the Federal Court of Justice say?
Federal Court of Justice (BGH)
BGH, judgment of 09.08.2022 – VI ZR 1244/20
On a review portal, the objection of the person reviewed that a review is not based on any guest contact is in principle sufficient to trigger the portal’s duty to investigate. More detailed reasoning is in principle not required.
Federal Court of Justice (BGH)
BGH, judgment of 01.03.2016 – VI ZR 34/15 (jameda)
A portal does not have to check posts in advance. After a specific complaint, however, it must investigate and assess the facts. On a doctor review portal, a conscientious review is decisive for protecting those reviewed.
The Federal Court of Justice supports this approach. A specifically worded complaint obliges the portal to investigate and assess the facts, taking into account a statement from the reviewer.
BGH, judgment of 01.03.2016 – VI ZR 34/15 (jameda)
Review cases combine the law on statements, corporate personality rights, platform terms and European procedural rules. Under Art. 16 DSA, platforms must provide a notice and action mechanism. Under Art. 17 DSA, they must give reasons for restrictions on content.
In practice, it is not enough for the complaint to be legally tenable. It must be structured so that the respective platform can review it.
Sources
- Digital Services Act (EUR-Lex) Reporting channels, complaint procedures and requirements for sufficiently precise notices of illegal content
- Google policies on prohibited reviews Fake engagement, conflicts of interest, review manipulation, off-topic content and offensive content
- Google: report inappropriate reviews Platform rules under which policy violations are reported and reviewed
- ITMR: Google must delete (in German) Distinction between removing reviews, deleting search results and damaging online content
- ITMR: anonymous statements on the internet – identifying the author (in German) Requirements, costs and deadlines for the disclosure of subscriber data under Section 21 TDDDG
Limits
When do we advise against removal?
A serious review strategy also examines when removal is not realistic, not a priority or risky in communication terms. This strengthens your position, because we do not push the case into a hopeless platform complaint.
- 1
Permissible experience review
If there was genuine contact and the review mainly expresses subjective dissatisfaction, a coordinated reply can make more sense than an attempt at removal.
- 2
Public conflict looms
If the reviewer is known, emotional or has a wide reach, the reaction must remain under legal and communicative control.
- 3
Broader reputation situation
If posts, press, search results, fake profiles or comments are affected as well as reviews, in our experience a broader reputation strategy is often the better fit.
Typical mistakes before the complaint
- Reporting the review merely as “untrue” or “damaging” without a specific point of attack
- Replying publicly and thereby disclosing sensitive information or lines of defence
- Challenging too many reviews across the board instead of prioritising the strongest cases
- Securing evidence only after the review or profile has been changed
- Addressing the platform, reviewers and the public at the same time without an escalation plan
- Mixing permissible criticism with unlawful statements of fact
Your contact
Jean Paul Bohne, LL.M., MM, CIPP/E, CIPM
Rechtsanwalt (lawyer) and mediator · partner · Fachanwalt for IT law · Fachanwalt for copyright and media law
View profile Düsseldorf, Schirmerstraße 80 · Hamburg, Palmaille 124
TOP Anwalt 2027 · business lawyers · intellectual property
F.A.Z.-Institut and QuantiQuest. Based on recommendations from fellow lawyers and assessments by in-house counsel. Source (opens in a new tab)
ReviewsWe do not check reviews of us on other platforms that we do not quote verbatim for authenticity. They may therefore also come from people who are not our clients. The rules of the respective platform apply. Reviews that we quote verbatim on our website, by contrast, have been checked for authenticity within the meaning of Section 5b(3) UWG (German Act against Unfair Competition): we compared the reviewers’ names with our client register. We also asked the respective platform to check the reviews for authenticity.
What clients say
5,0 von 5 · 71 Bewertungen auf anwalt.dePeriod: October 2018 to date · As of: 28 October 2026
“ITMR Rechtsanwälte (Mr Jean Paul Bohne) advised us very competently and acted on our behalf. We expressly recommend the firm. Our case concerned the successful defence against an unjustified Google review on our profile. …” (translated from German)
“Mr Bohne is very competent, listens well and speaks honestly and clearly. I am very satisfied with the advice!” (translated from German)
“Mr Jean Paul P. Bohne was very friendly and explained the matter to me, as a layperson, in an easily understandable way. I can only recommend Mr Bohne, you are in the best hands here. Happy to come back to you. Helga N.-W.” (translated from German)
FAQ
Frequently asked questions about removing negative reviews
When is it worth hiring a lawyer to have a negative review removed?
Legal help is particularly worthwhile if the review visibly affects your business or the actual contact is doubtful. This also applies if specific false facts are alleged, several reviews come together or the platform has rejected your own report.
Can every negative review be removed?
No. Permissible criticism and genuine experience reports can remain, even if they are commercially unpleasant. A review becomes challengeable above all in the case of false facts, a lack of actual contact, insults, infringement of personality rights, conflicts of interest, spam, off-topic content or policy violations.
Source (in German): BGH, judgment of 01.03.2016 – VI ZR 34/15 (jameda)
How can a Google review be removed?
We challenge a Google review on the basis of a specific policy or legal violation. Solid grounds include a lack of customer contact, suspected fakes, conflicts of interest, spam, offensive content, off-topic content or verifiably false facts. In our experience, a general report that a review is unfair is usually not enough.
Source: Google policies on prohibited reviews
Why the objection of missing customer contact is often the strongest lever is explained in our article (in German) Removing a review without customer contact.
Is it enough to point out that there was no customer contact?
In many cases, yes. In our experience, the lack of customer, patient, client or business contact is often a strong starting point. According to the BGH (VI ZR 1244/20), this objection in principle already triggers the portal’s duty to investigate. More detailed reasoning is only necessary if the reviewer’s identity is readily apparent from the review. It then depends on how plausibly we present the missing connection and whether the review contains specific insider information.
Source (in German): BGH, judgment of 09.08.2022 – VI ZR 1244/20
What matters with anonymous reviews?
Anonymous reviews are not automatically impermissible. They become challengeable if there is no actual connection, the identity is not plausible, specific false events are alleged or the platform does not seriously review the complaint. Disclosure of subscriber data under Section 21 TDDDG requires a criminal offence from the statutory catalogue.
Source (in German): Section 21 TDDDG: anonymous statements – identifying the author
Should a company reply publicly to the review?
Sometimes, yes, but not in haste. Public replies can stabilise trust but can also disclose customer data, internal processes or lines of defence. In the case of false allegations, HR matters, medical topics or legal escalation, we coordinate the reply strategy in advance.
What do we need for the initial review?
Helpful are the direct link to the review, a screenshot, the date, platform, profile name and a short description of the facts. Add to this information on possible contact, relevant internal evidence and previous platform replies. With several reviews, we record patterns, times and locations separately.
Can we take action against the reviewer?
Yes, but not within this package. The package is directed against the platform, which in many cases is the first effective point of attack. If the person is identifiable or can realistically be identified and a claim appears justified, we separately review cease-and-desist, deletion, correction, disclosure and court action on request and as needed.
Does the Digital Services Act play a role in review cases?
Yes, above all for reporting channels, statements of reasons, handling and complaint procedures at platforms. However, the DSA does not replace the substantive review of whether the specific content is unlawful under German or European law or violates platform rules.
Why not simply hire a removal agency?
Reviews should not be handled with dubious mass tickets, pressure campaigns or artificial review manipulation. This can make the situation worse and trigger further platform risks. We rely on a clean complaint that brings together the legal position, policies and evidence.
What applies to waves of reviews across several profiles or platforms?
Then we do not look at each review in isolation. What matters are patterns, the timeline, identical wording, possible originators, platform reactions and the question of which content we challenge first. In the case of broader escalation, our reputation protection service is often the better starting point.
Get started
Have the review link and evidence checked by a lawyer
If a review on Google, Kununu, Jameda, Trustpilot or another platform has a noticeable business impact, the case should not start with a general complaint. We examine precisely which statement is challengeable, which evidence is sufficient, where at the platform we start and which escalation remains open.
This helps us with the initial review
- Direct link to the review and the affected profile
- Screenshot with date, star rating, text and profile name
- A brief note on whether there was customer, patient, client or business contact
- Internal evidence such as orders, appointments, invoices, CRM entries, emails, bookings or location data
- Records of platform reports, rejections or previous replies
- A note on the commercial relevance for sales, recruiting, practice, location, brand or campaign
Most helpful are the review link, a screenshot, the platform, the date and brief information on whether there was customer, patient, client or business contact. We represent you vis-à-vis the platform.
Have a review checked
Send us the link to the review and your contact details.
Helpful are the link to the review, a screenshot and a brief explanation of why the content is inaccurate.
Related services
Hate speech & reputation protection For coordinated digital attacks, fake profiles, waves of comments, search results and multi-channel reputational damage.Media law For the broader assessment of publication, platform, review, reputation and commercially sensitive communication.Competition law If reviews are part of a market conduct conflict, a competitor strategy or a warning letter situation.Media and communications law If the focus between press, platform, reputation, social media and content is still open.
From our blog (in German): Google must delete · Anonymous statements: identifying the author · Removing a review without customer contact · 1-star review without text