Home › Restaurants, pubs and small hotels › Running the venue
Running the venue
Review reply writer: a reply to a bad Google or TripAdvisor review that an owner would sign
Make a reply to a Google or TripAdvisor review from the stars, the issue and what you changed, under 120 words and inside the rules on incentivised reviews.
"How to respond to bad reviews" is among the most-typed hospitality searches, and most of the examples online are either grovelling or a fight. The writer produces a reply in a third register: it thanks, names the specific thing, states what happened once without arguing, says what changed, and takes the rest offline. It is written for the next hundred people who read it, not for the one who wrote the review.
Free tool
Review reply writer: a reply to a Google or TripAdvisor review that an owner would sign
Works in your browser. Nothing you type leaves this device unless you ask us to email you the result.
Who the reply is for
The reviewer has already decided. The reader deciding whether to book has not, and what they want to see is an owner who answers, is specific, and does not blame the customer. A reply that disputes the facts line by line reads as defensive even when it is right. A reply that says "sorry, we've fixed it" reads as a venue that runs properly, which is the only thing the reader is trying to find out.
The five parts
- Thanks, by first name. The review is public information you did not have to pay for.
- The specific thing. "Sorry about the wait" is better than "sorry you had a bad experience", because it shows the owner read the review.
- The fact, once. "We were a chef down that night" is context, stated once, not an excuse repeated. If there is no fact to add, leave the field blank and the reply skips it.
- What changed. The rota, the booking cut-off, the dish. This is the line the next reader is looking for.
- Offline. An invitation to contact the owner directly, or to come back and ask for them by name. Not a public negotiation.
Then a signature with a real name and role. "The management" signs nothing.
The rule that matters
Since 6 April 2025 the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 has banned fake reviews, concealed incentivised reviews and the commissioning of either, with penalties of up to 10% of global turnover, and the CMA has said platforms and businesses must take reasonable steps against them. The line operators cross most often, usually with good intentions, is "come back on us and we'll make it right, and perhaps you'd update the review". That is an incentive for a review. The writer's replies never offer anything in exchange for editing or removing a review, and the note under each reply says so, so that whoever posts it knows why.
Inviting a customer back, with no condition attached, is fine. Offering to put things right in private is fine. The condition is the problem.
Good reviews
Reply to them too, briefly. The writer produces a three-line thank-you that names the specific thing the reviewer liked and passes it to the team. Do not ask for anything, and do not use the reply to advertise the Sunday roast; the reader can see the menu.
Length
Under 120 words, every time. Reviews are read on phones, replies are read after the review, and a reply longer than the review is skipped.
What the writer will not do
It will not post. An owner reads every reply before it goes up, because the venue's name is on it. Operators in the 2026 Access Hospitality survey who use AI for review replies said they always check it, and that is the right habit. An AI Reviews Host set up by Overlyft drafts every reply in this form and leaves the posting to the owner.
For the complaints that arrive as bookings rather than reviews, the no-show cost calculator and the function quote maker cover the terms that stop most of them starting.
Short answers from this page
How should a restaurant reply to a bad review?
In under 120 words: thank the reviewer, name the specific problem, say what has changed, and invite them to contact the manager directly. Never offer a discount, a free meal or a voucher in return for editing or removing the review; incentivised reviews have been banned since 6 April 2025.
Source: Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024
Where this comes from: CMA guidance on the DMCC Act 2024 fake reviews provisions (CMA208, April 2025), via data/sectors/hospitality.json; Price Bailey and Access Hospitality report on AI in UK hospitality, 2026 (operators use AI for review replies and "always check it"); all read 2026-10-01.
AEO Lookup editorial team
We write practical guides for people who run small UK firms, and we check every fact against its source on the date shown. Read how we review, or tell us if something has changed.
