Consumer Review Policy

1. About this policy

This policy explains how Muddy Boots Escapes Ltd, company number 14702173, approaches consumer reviews and review information published on our website. It covers review text, star ratings, scores, review counts and summaries for Scarpa, Arcade Royale and La Petite Mews.

Our registered office and formal correspondence address is Unit 27, Cumberland House, Business Park, St Lukes Road, Kirkby Stephen, Cumbria CA17 4HT. Contact [email protected] or 07346 006156.

We remain responsible for taking reasonable and proportionate steps to prevent and remove fake reviews, concealed incentivised reviews and misleading review information we publish, including material displayed through third-party tools.

2. Where reviews come from

Our reviews come from Airbnb, Booking.com, Vrbo, Google and direct website reviews submitted through our review-aggregation service. Revyoos and Trustindex aggregate the reviews. Revyoos is the primary review display on our public website; Trustindex provides a secondary display. The source of an individual review should be shown with it or be readily accessible.

Reviews for different properties must be attributed clearly. A review of one property should not be presented as a review of another. A combined business-wide display must be identified as such.

A published review or a platform label is not, by itself, proof that we have independently verified the writer’s identity or stay. Any “verified guest” or equivalent claim must have a substantiated and explained verification basis.

3. Honest feedback and incentives

We do not offer payments, gifts, discounts, complimentary stays or other incentives in exchange for reviews. Reviews should reflect a real experience and the reviewer’s honest opinion. Fake reviews, fabricated guest experiences, reviews commissioned to manipulate ratings, and AI-generated reviews presented as genuine guest accounts are prohibited.

Review invitations should be neutral. We must not offer a reward conditional on a positive rating, or ask only apparently satisfied guests for public feedback while directing dissatisfied guests solely into a private complaints process.

Where a review has been incentivised, that fact must be clearly disclosed wherever necessary to prevent the review misleading readers, and the source platform’s rules must be respected. Concealed incentives are prohibited. A payment, gift, discount, complimentary stay or other benefit may constitute an incentive.

4. How reviews are displayed

Our widgets are not configured to hide lower ratings or show only positive feedback. We display our review record without a minimum-rating filter. A carousel may show only some cards at once; this does not mean only those reviews exist. Reviews must not be selected, ordered, edited or summarised in a way that creates a misleading impression. Negative reviews must not be hidden or removed merely because they are critical.

A short testimonial selection must be labelled as selected guest comments and must not be presented as the complete review record or a representative overall score without supporting evidence. Labelling a selection does not excuse a misleading presentation.

Display limitations, such as the number of cards in a carousel, must not conceal material information. Where feasible, readers should be able to follow through to the source or a fuller review display.

If text is shortened, its meaning must remain intact and omissions should be apparent. Translations must preserve meaning and be identified where appropriate.

5. Scores, counts and summaries

Any displayed score should make clear the source and whether it relates to one property or the business as a whole. Different platforms can use different rating scales and eligibility rules.

Revyoos and Trustindex may present aggregated review information. Their displays can differ because their feeds, refresh timings or presentation methods differ. A provider score is not a separate score independently calculated by us. Any conversion or combination of different platform scales must have a sound method explained to readers; please contact us if a displayed calculation or scope is unclear. Review counts must be accurate for the stated scope; duplicated imports of the same review must not inflate a claimed count or score.

Automated or AI-assisted summaries must accurately reflect the reviews they summarise, including relevant negative feedback. They must be labelled as summaries and must not appear to be a quotation or a new review written by a guest.

Widgets can update at different times from source platforms. Material discrepancies should be checked and corrected rather than relied on indefinitely.

6. Checks and moderation

Our review-management policy requires the following proportionate steps:

• Identify the sources, properties, widget settings and review information being published, and assess the risks of fake, incentivised or misleading material.
• Check the provider’s filtering and moderation features and avoid settings that suppress reviews merely because of their rating.
• Check suspicious material against available booking/context information without collecting unnecessary personal information.
• Investigate concerns raised by guests, platforms or other readers; consider evidence fairly rather than assuming that a critical review is false.
• Check attribution, repeated imports, score calculations, summaries and outdated information.
• Review whether these steps are effective and improve them when problems are identified.

Potential grounds for moderation include evidence of fabrication, unrelated/spam content, undisclosed incentives, impersonation, unlawful material, abusive threats or unnecessary disclosure of personal information. Decisions must be based on the content and evidence, not whether the review is positive or negative. Disagreement with an opinion is not itself proof of a fake review.

7. Corrections, removal and platform limits

Where material we publish is found to be fake, concealed-incentivised or misleading, we must take appropriate steps to remove or correct it promptly and check related scores or summaries.

If we cannot edit the source review, we can report it to the originating platform and address the misleading publication on our own site using the available display controls. A platform report does not replace our own responsibility for what we publish.

Where an investigation justifies temporarily withholding disputed material, decisions should be fair, documented and proportionate, with the position reviewed when evidence becomes available. Legitimate criticism must not be routinely withheld.

Relevant decisions and evidence must be recorded to support consistent handling. A reviewer may contact us with further information or ask for reconsideration. We will consider it and explain our response where appropriate.

8. Report a review concern

Email [email protected] with the subject “Review concern”. Please include the review link or screenshot, source platform, property, approximate date and the reason for your concern, with any relevant evidence.

Please do not send unnecessary sensitive information. We will assess the concern, seek clarification where needed and explain any action we can take. A review concern and a complaint about your stay can be considered together without treating genuine criticism as grounds for removal.

9. Providers, privacy and trust badges

See Revyoos’s Privacy Policy, Revyoos information, Trustindex’s Privacy Policy and Trustindex’s Terms of Use.

Our Privacy & Data Protection notice contains references for Airbnb, Booking.com, Vrbo, Sykes, Lakelovers, Visit Lake District and Google. Each source platform applies its own review rules.

Published review information can include a reviewer’s display name, review text, score, date and source-profile information. Do not include payment details, access codes or other sensitive information in public reviews.

A Trustindex badge is a provider’s trust signal. It must not be presented as proof that every review is genuine or as certification of our legal compliance.

10. Policy review and further information

We will review this policy and our arrangements when sources, display settings or services change, or when an identified issue shows that our checks need improving.

For the legal guidance, see the Competition and Markets Authority’s fake-reviews guidance.

Return to Policies & Legal · Contact us · Complaints & Dispute Resolution · Third-Party Providers

11. Common review questions

Do you pay for reviews?

No. We offer no incentives in exchange for reviews.

Do you hide low ratings?

No. Our widgets are not set to filter out lower ratings. A limited number of cards may be visible at once, but the display is not restricted to positive reviews.

Where do the reviews come from?

Airbnb, Booking.com, Vrbo, Google and direct website reviews submitted through our review-aggregation service. Revyoos is our primary public display; Trustindex is secondary.

Does a platform review mean you have independently verified the guest?

No. A source-platform label is not the same as independent verification by Muddy Boots Escapes. Any verification claim must have a clear, supportable basis.

Can I report a suspicious or incorrectly attributed review?

Yes. Email us with the source, review link, property and reason for your concern. We will consider the evidence; criticism alone does not make a review false.

Does a trust badge certify every review or legal compliance?

No. A third-party badge is a provider trust signal, not a guarantee that every review is genuine or certification of legal compliance.

Do I need to remove a review to raise a complaint?

No. You can use our complaints process without removing genuine criticism or changing your rating.