01
Eligibility assessment
We review your circumstances against the criteria search engines actually apply — relevance, accuracy, time elapsed and public interest — and tell you honestly whether your case has merit before you commit.
Right to Be Forgotten Specialists · UK
Your past should not define your search results.
Specialist consultation and submission of Right to Be Forgotten requests to Google, Bing and Yahoo. Discreet. Expert. UK-based.
We work exclusively on Article 17 UK GDPR delisting. Not general reputation management. Not “review removal.” This is our entire practice.
The problem
When search results hold you back
A conviction from years ago. A spent sentence. A news article that no longer reflects who you are. When someone searches your name, these results appear — and they can affect employment, housing, professional relationships and family life.
The law recognises that the public interest in retaining this information diminishes over time. The Right to Be Forgotten exists to restore that balance. But it is not automatic, and it is not well understood — by the public, or by many agencies that claim to offer it.
What we do
Three parts of a single, focused service
Every engagement follows the same structure. No retainers, no ongoing marketing packages, no work outside the scope of a Right to Be Forgotten request.
02
Expert submission
We prepare and submit RTBF requests to Google, Bing and Yahoo. Requests must be precise: exact URLs, name variants, identity verification and carefully argued grounds under Article 17 UK GDPR. A badly constructed request is refused.
03
Follow-up & appeals
If a search engine refuses, we advise on complaints to the Information Commissioner’s Office and revised submissions with strengthened evidence. Refusal is not always the end of the process.
Eligibility
Who this is for
The Right to Be Forgotten applies to individuals, and only where the balance of privacy against public interest favours delisting.
- Individuals with spent or old criminal convictions seeking to move on professionally or personally.
- People affected by outdated news coverage that no longer reflects current circumstances.
- Anyone whose name search returns information that is inaccurate, irrelevant or excessive.
We do not assist with active criminal proceedings, or with attempts to conceal current public-interest information. Eligibility is assessed on the legal balancing test — not on convenience.
Why expertise matters
The difference between a request and a successful request
Search engines reject a large share of Right to Be Forgotten requests when they are submitted without proper legal framing. The reasons are structural: the balancing test between privacy and public interest is discretionary and subjective, and the quality of the argument matters.
Our work is not form-filling. It is the construction of an argument that engages with how Google, Bing and the ICO actually assess these cases — the relevance of spent convictions under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974, the significance of time elapsed, and the distinction between delisting and erasure.
That distinction is the whole of the practice.
Insights
How we think about the work
Precise, practical writing on the legal and technical mechanics of delisting.
The spent conviction is not the end of the story
Time is the single biggest factor in a Right to Be Forgotten request. Here is how the “Personal Privacy Zone” actually works.
Read articleWhat Google actually looks for
The four words that decide most requests — inaccurate, inadequate, irrelevant, excessive — and what each of them really means.
Read articleReady to discuss your situation?
All enquiries are treated in strict confidence. We respond within two working days.
Request a Confidential Assessment