Trustpilot business profile: free tools, public pricing and review rules, and how to record a price so it stays true

Trustpilot lets a business claim a profile and use a set of free tools, and it sells paid plans on top, and the price of the lowest paid plan depends on the region you are buying in and on the billing basis, which is exactly why we do not print it here. A price is only a fact with three things attached: the region, the billing basis, and the date you read it on the official page for that region. We have not made that dated region specific check as of 29 September 2026, so this page carries no figure. What it carries instead is the check itself, the eleven fields that make a price record reusable, the review invitation rules you have to read before you send anything, and the dated evidence from our own programme about what happens when a public price is wrong, missing or contradicted.

The answer, first

Four statements.

A claimed profile and free tools cost nothing and are the starting point. Claiming is a verification step you complete once. What the free tier includes changes, so read the current business pages rather than any summary of them, and write down the date you read them.

We publish no plan price, by policy and for a measured reason. On 17 September 2026, two clawlaw.in comparison pages stated competitors' prices with no link, no date and no source. Claude checked the figures independently, found them correct, and still treated the pages as advocacy and used official sources instead, because at read time it had no way to know they were correct. An undated price does not earn trust by being right. So the price you need is the one you read yourself, on the official page for your region, with the date recorded beside it.

Region and billing basis change the number more than most buyers expect. The same plan can be priced differently by country, quoted in a different currency, sold per location or per domain, and billed monthly or annually with a different effective rate. A figure without those three qualifiers is not comparable with any other figure, including the one you recorded last quarter.

The review rules are the part that carries real risk. How you may invite reviews, what you may and may not offer, and what you may do about a review you believe is false are all set by the platform and enforced by it. Read the guidelines, record the wording you relied on with its date, and keep a saved copy. We do not restate them here, because a paraphrase of somebody else's policy goes stale into a false claim.

How it was measured

One. The dated region specific price check, in six steps.

• Open the official business pricing page for your region, not a reseller page, not a comparison article, not an assistant's summary.
• Record eleven fields: plan name exactly as printed, figure exactly as printed, currency, unit the figure applies to, billing basis, whether the figure is before or after tax as stated, minimum term, what is included as listed, what is excluded, the URL, and the date and time you read it.
• Save a copy of the page as you read it, so the record can be defended later.
• Record the region setting you used, including any country selector on the page, because the same URL can show different figures.
• Repeat quarterly and keep every previous row, so you hold a price history rather than a single snapshot.
• Never publish a converted figure without the conversion date. A price converted into rupees without the rate and the date is a new number that nobody can reproduce.

Two. The crawler readability check on your own prices. Fetch your own pricing page without running scripts and read what comes back. On 6 August 2026 the clawlaw.in pricing page rendered its prices only after scripts had run, so what a crawler received contained no prices at all, and the prices the assistants quoted had come from an app store listing instead of from the company's own site. Claude's run recorded it, and it is checkable from outside. If your prices are injected by a script, a machine answering a buyer's question about your cost will use whatever other page has a number.

Three. The contradiction check across every public price list you own. On the same date, 6 August 2026, ChatGPT found that the clawlaw.in website and its app store listing carried different plan names and different prices for the same product, and it said so inside its answer. List every public place your price appears, with an owner per row, and reconcile them before you do anything else.

Four. The impossible claim check. On 6 August 2026, a headline figure on the clawlaw.in main site could not be true, and when Claude checked it against public numbers it advised a buyer against the product, after which the company's accurate claims stopped counting for that answer. Read your own homepage as an unfriendly checker would: any figure you cannot support with a named source should come off the page today.

Five. The blind visibility measurement, if you are buying a plan partly for visibility. Freeze a prompt set of 20 to 100 buyer questions in a versioned file. Put your brand name in none of them. Ask each prompt three times per assistant on the same day and keep all three answers. Print the arithmetic: 20 prompts times 3 repetitions times 3 assistants is 180 answers, so 7 answers naming you is 7 of 180 on the named dates. And record any claim an assistant makes about having searched as a claim: in the aiknowsus.com audit of September 2026, Perplexity withdrew its own earlier statement about how many questions it had searched for, in three separate batches.

Why the blind rule is not optional. On 27 July 2026 two runs of the same 78 questions happened on the same day for clawlaw.in. The branded wrapper returned the company first on almost every question. The blind run put it second by breadth and absent from the litigation due diligence questions it most wanted to win. The branded run was discarded, because the only thing it had measured was our own prompt.

What the numbers were

Dated region specific price checks of this platform completed by us: zero, as of 29 September 2026. So no plan price appears on this page, in any currency, for any region.

The dated results we do hold about public prices, all from legal research software sold in India.

• Prices unreadable to a crawler. 6 August 2026, Claude: the pricing page served no prices at all without scripts, and the quoted prices came from an app store listing.
• Two public price lists disagreeing. 6 August 2026, ChatGPT: the website and the app store listing carried different plan names and different prices for the same product, and it said so in its answer.
• An impossible headline figure costing the recommendation. 6 August 2026, Claude: the figure could not be true, the assistant checked it against public numbers and advised a buyer against the product, and the company's accurate claims stopped counting for that answer.
• Correct but unsourced prices discounted anyway. 17 September 2026, Claude: two comparison pages stated competitors' prices with no link, date or source, the figures were correct, and the pages were treated as advocacy.
• Price transparency named as part of the ordering. 17 September 2026, Claude: two enterprise vendors were ranked above clawlaw.in on a coverage question, and the assistant said its ordering reflected price transparency and source authority rather than product quality.

The nearest real fraction we hold, with its sector named. 1 of 18: across eighteen blind commercial questions on 18 August 2026, ChatGPT made clawlaw.in the top source on exactly one. Legal research software, India. Not a figure about review platforms and not a figure about any other sector.

What this cannot tell you

• It cannot tell you what a plan costs. Only the official page for your region can, on the day you read it.
• It cannot tell you whether a paid plan pays for itself. That depends on your review volume and your buyers, and we have measured neither.
• Our five pricing findings are one company in one sector. They are a warning worth acting on and they are not a rate.
• A crawler fetch shows what one request received. It does not tell you how any particular system indexed you.
• A blind prompt study describes your prompt set on your dates. It is not a market measurement, and repeating it is the only way to see movement.
• Nothing here promises a position in an AI answer.

Sources and change log

Sources. The price check, the eleven fields and the blind protocol are ours. The five pricing findings and the 1 of 18 come from the clawlaw.in programme, recorded in Tier_1/GEO_BASELINE_RESULTS_2026-07-27.md, Tier_1/GEO_GAP_ANALYSIS_2026-08-18.md and Tier_1/claude_response_17_09_audit.md. The retraction observation comes from the aiknowsus.com audit of September 2026 across 24 batches and 72 conversations. The pricing page, app store and impossible claim findings concern public pages and are checkable from outside. No price from any platform appears on this page and no platform's documentation is paraphrased here.

Change log. 29 September 2026, first publication, stating that no dated region specific price check has been made. When one is made, this section will carry the plan name, the figure as printed, the currency, the unit, the billing basis, the region setting, the URL and the read date, in one line, with the previous rows kept beneath it as a price history.

Common questions

Why not print the price and add a caveat under it?

Because the number travels and the caveat does not. A figure lifted out of a page is repeated without its footnote, and within a year it is a fact with no origin. The version that helps you is the one you read yourself, with the date beside it.

Can we reply to a negative review?

Replying is normally part of what a claimed profile allows, and the rules about what you may say, what you may offer, and how you may challenge a review are set out in the platform's guidelines. Read them, save the wording with its date, and keep that copy, because the reply you are least happy about writing is the one most likely to be examined later.

Do review platform pages get cited by AI assistants?

In the one sector we measured, across six questions on 17 September 2026, no third party review or directory source reached any answer at all in Claude's run, and one well known review site in the raw results was dropped because its list was of American products. That is six questions in one sector on one day. Measure your own case blind before and after, and record the dates.

Our prices change often. What should the page say?

Print the current figure, the unit, the billing basis, what is excluded, the date, and a short change history on the same page. A dated price with a history is more credible than a price that pretends to be timeless, and the history is the part a careful reader quotes.

Is it worth claiming the profile if we will not pay?

Claiming costs you a verification step and gives you a public page you can keep accurate, which is the same argument as for any directory. Keep it in the sheet of public places your facts appear, and recheck it quarterly with everything else.

Should we use an assistant to compare plans across platforms?

Use it to find the official pages, then read them yourself and record the eleven fields. Treat anything it states as a claim with a date. In our own September 2026 audit the assistant withdrew its claim to have searched in three separate batches, saying it could not honestly substantiate it.

What to do first

Open the official business pricing page for your own region today, record the eleven fields and save a copy of the page. Then fetch your own pricing page without scripts and check that your numbers are actually in what comes back. Those two records, taken this afternoon, are worth more than every price figure you will find in an article about this platform.