The 41-year-old architect went for fake one-star Google reviews from companies run by rivals and exes
An ‘imminent’ architect has been deleted for making up obnoxious web reviews of his ex-partners’ companies.
Andrew Guy, 41, used a series of pseudonyms to post fictional one-star reviews on Google.
The Hampshire designer was removed from the profession after a watchdog found him guilty of “harassing behavior.”
Andrew Guy, 41, has been deleted by the Architects Registration Board after being found guilty of ‘harassing behavior’
The Architects Registration Board heard how he attacked eight companies with the aggressive posts, including rivals and companies run by two women he dated.
The watchdog revealed how a guest house owner – who only had two dates with Guy – suddenly received a string of negative reviews in late 2018.
Four humble one-star reviews appeared under different names claiming that her B&B was ‘absolutely shocking’, with ‘rude owners’ and ‘small, noisy and dirty’ rooms.
Under the name ‘Chris Ede’ it said in the review: ‘I can’t believe that this so-called b + b has so many good reviews.
“Look under the bed for a collection of beautiful fabric! AVOID. ‘
Guy, under the name Karen Oman, added in another post: ‘Dirty poor quality b + b. Bathrooms are filthy !! “.
A third fake review, from ‘Jane Baker’, warned, ‘I stayed there and it’s dirty, poorly insulated … and the shower was filthy! Let’s see if the owners pretend I didn’t stay there *. Then I post my invoice and photos online. ‘
Another woman, who dated Guy for three months in 2004, also received three scathing reviews from ‘Karen Oman’.
Her ‘small market’ cake stand was blasted for its ‘awful, cheap quality products’.
Fake reviews left on other Google profiles included an architecture firm where Guy worked and a rental agent he allegedly owed money to.
The Architects Registration Board (pictured) turned Guy down after discovering that his “ dishonesty was deliberate, repeated, and intended to damage eight companies to reputation ”
He called the agency “corrupt,” “arrogant,” and “rude.”
Guy, who led Discussed Architects in Havant, Hants, had not appeared at the hearing.
In previous correspondence with the regulator, he maintained that he had been a ‘malicious target’ and that his accusers had ‘made their complaints perfect’.
The watchdog could not categorically prove that the fake posts were made by Guy, but said it was “more likely than not” that he was behind them.
The ARB said a number of factors pointed to the architect, including that he was the only common link between the eight otherwise unrelated goals.
The panel said that Guy ‘had a connection with each of the parties’ and in a number of cases the relationship ‘did not end positively’.
It added, “The language, tone and style of the messages were similar, making it more likely that the messages were from the same person.
A number of witnesses also stated that the tone was similar to the language Mr. Guy had previously used. The committee found that the tone also resembled the tone of Mr. Guy’s correspondence with the ARB. ‘
The architect’s supervisor described his witnesses as ‘credible and reliable’.
It decided to remove Guy from the registry because of his “serious dishonesty” and “deep-seated integrity issues,” which he said were “fundamentally incompatible” with being an architect.
President Julian Weinberg turned him down for unacceptable professional conduct: “Guy’s dishonesty was deliberate, repeated, and intended to damage eight companies’ reputation and was a sign of a serious lack of integrity.
The negative bookings lasted about 10 months and only stopped when he was informed that possible measures had been taken against him.
‘Clients must be able to trust architects. That is an essential part of what it means to be a professional. ‘
‘[His] behavior was menacing and intimidating, targeting other architectural practices and two women with whom he had had a relationship. ‘
Guy was approached for comment, but did not respond.