Last updated: August 2026
VettaCoach reviews are community-sourced. They are the reason this platform exists. These guidelines exist to protect their integrity, not to make reviews easier to remove.
Specific: describe what you actually experienced: the program structure, the coach's communication style, what you paid, what you got. Vague sentiment without substance will be rejected. First-hand: your own experience only. You cannot review a coach based on what someone else told you. Balanced: the most useful reviews acknowledge both strengths and weaknesses, even if the overall experience was strongly positive or negative. Honest: do not exaggerate, fabricate, or omit material facts.
Reviews must be at least 50 words. Ratings submitted without substantive written content will be rejected.
Both program reviews and discovery call reviews require a verified VettaCoach account. There is no email-only or anonymous submission path. This applies equally to both review types.
We will remove a review only if it: contains a credible threat or harassment directed at an individual; discloses private personal information (address, phone number, family members); was clearly submitted by a competitor or someone with a direct financial interest in the outcome; was written in exchange for an incentive of any kind (a discount, refund, freebie, or other benefit offered by the coach); is a duplicate of a review already published from the same account; or contains no substantive content (rating only, placeholder text, or content unrelated to a coaching experience).
The coach disagreeing with it. The coach finding it upsetting. The coach contesting it without evidence. Volume of coach complaints. The review being negative.
Program reviews cover paid coaching programs or courses. Discovery call reviews cover sales or intro calls. These are displayed separately on coach profiles. Discovery call reviews do not affect a coach's program rating.
We will never remove a review because a coach paid us, asked us to, or threatened legal action. When we receive a request to identify a reviewer, our default response is to decline; where we believe a legal demand is being used to suppress an honest review, we will object to it, and we may notify the affected reviewer so they can protect their own interests.
Under the federal Consumer Review Fairness Act, it is unlawful for a business to use contract terms, such as a non-disparagement or "gag" clause in a program agreement, to penalise you for posting an honest review of your experience. A coach cannot lawfully sue you into silence or fine you for a truthful review, and we will not remove an honest review because a coach claims you "agreed" not to post one. This protects honest, first-hand reviews; it does not protect reviews that are fake, defamatory, or that otherwise violate these guidelines.