Misrepresentation is not one rule. It is a family of them, and they are not enforced the same way. One sub-policy suspends your account on detection; the others stop ads and issue strikes. Which you are in changes everything about what happens next.
No cost. A straight answer within one business day on which sub-policy you are actually in.
Read the notice carefully
The misrepresentation family covers misleading representation, dishonest pricing practices, clickbait, and unacceptable business practices. They are not equivalent, and the notice names the specific one.
This sub-policy is classed as egregious. It suspends the account on detection, with no warning and no strike sequence, and it is the only member of the family that behaves that way.
It is written for phishing and impersonation. In practice it also catches businesses whose identity, pricing or commercial relationships cannot be established from their own website.
If your notice names this one, the account is suspended rather than restricted, and the argument is about what can be verified about your business from outside it.
These generally stop ads rather than accounts, and escalate through the strike system if repeated. Named conduct includes a business name that does not clearly represent the advertised business or distinguish it from similar ones; failure to clearly and conspicuously disclose the payment model or full expense a user will bear; pricing practices creating a false impression of cost; and sensationalist or clickbait ad content.
Three of these are common in ordinary professional services. A trading name that differs from the legal entity. Retainer or subscription pricing not disclosed before commitment. A 'from' price where the real cost is materially higher.
None of that requires dishonesty. All of it is named conduct, and all of it is fixable before it escalates.
Not sure which sub-policy your notice names?
Get it reviewedBefore you do anything else
An appeal that argues you are not misleading anyone, without addressing the specific sub-policy named, does not engage with what was actually detected. Google reinstates only in compelling circumstances, and a general denial is not one.
Most of this family is decided by what the destination discloses rather than by what the ad says. Ad copy that promises something the page does not keep is a mismatch, and the page is usually the half that has to change.
The strike-based sub-policies escalate. No strike is issued for a first violation, then three strikes maximum: a three-day hold, a seven-day hold, and then suspension. Repeatedly resubmitting the same ad is how advertisers walk themselves up that ladder.
Providing an inaccurate business name, or one that does not clearly represent the advertised business or distinguish it from similar businesses, is named conduct. This is common and entirely innocent, and it is still the finding.
If one of these has already happened, the case is harder but not over.
Get it reviewedHow this works
Six questions about the notice and what changed in the business before it arrived. Answered within one business day with a read on the likely cause and whether it is worth pursuing.
If it is worth pursuing, read-only access to the account and a look at the site. The real cause is rarely the one the advertiser expects, and it is not visible from outside.
What actually triggered it, what has to change on the account and the site before an appeal can succeed, and the evidence to submit alongside it.
Drafted and submitted once the account is genuinely ready for re-review, then managed through to the decision.
Get it reviewed
The notice you received and what changed in the business before it arrived are usually enough to identify the cause. No account access needed to answer these, and you get a reply within one business day.
Thanks — that's come through.
I'll come back to you shortly.
That didn't send. Something went wrong at our end, not yours.
Email me directly at rob@leftclick.co.nz and I'll pick it up from there.
A reply within one business day, from me. No cost, no obligation, and if it isn't worth pursuing you'll be told that plainly.
Prefer email? rob@leftclick.co.nz
Nineteen years in search marketing. Eight of them running my own agency, sold in 2021. Four years managing seven-figure United States advertising accounts in consumer credit, a category Google scrutinises hardest.
In that industry, compliance, suspensions, disapprovals and verification reviews are a frequent occurrence and a condition of operating.
You deal with me directly, from the first reply through to the decision.
Questions
No. Google decides. What can be committed to is an honest read on whether the case is arguable, a correctly identified root cause, and an appeal built around the actual detection rather than around fairness.
A disapproval rather than a suspension, which means you are almost certainly in one of the strike-based sub-policies. That is the better position to be in, and it is also the point at which it is cheapest to fix, because it has not escalated yet.
Partly. Unacceptable business practices sits under the misrepresentation family and is classed as egregious, suspending on detection. The other sub-policies generally produce disapprovals and strikes. The notice names which one applies.
It can be. The named conduct is a business name that does not clearly represent the advertised business or distinguish it from similar businesses. A well-established trading name usually satisfies that; a generic one that could describe several firms often does not.
Not automatically, but it is the pattern the policy describes when the final figure is materially higher. What matters is whether a reasonable person could tell, before committing, what they will actually pay or how it will be determined.
Google said in November 2025 that 99% of suspensions are resolved within twenty-four hours. Advertisers continue to report far longer waits. Expect days, plan for longer, and do not submit a second appeal while the first is open.