sample report

See what a Merchant Center audit report looks like.

This is an anonymised sample generated by the internal Useful Patch audit workflow. Real reports vary by intake, screenshots, product examples, and feed details.

Start the £199 audit
Sample only. Useful Patch does not guarantee approval or reinstatement, and does not invent product identifiers or compliance evidence.

Useful Patch Merchant Center Audit Draft: example-shop-test


Important boundary

This is an audit draft, not a guarantee of approval or reinstatement. Google decides review outcomes. The goal is to identify likely issue patterns, safe next steps, and changes that should not be guessed.


Intake summary

  • Store URL: example-shop.test
  • Reported issue: Google Merchant Center suspended for misrepresentation. Google support sends copy-paste replies and says the site is still non-compliant.
  • Product examples: example-shop.test/products/red-widget, example-shop.test/products/blue-widget
  • Feed URL/export: not supplied
  • Already tried: Updated returns page, added contact form, requested review twice.
  • Extra notes: Shopify store. Owner thinks everything is compliant but Google will not specify the remaining issue.

  • Triage classification

  • Labels: misrepresentation, suspension
  • Draft confidence: medium
  • Blockers / missing evidence:
  • - Policy/account-level issue needs sanity review before customer delivery


    Ranked audit checks

    1. Review readiness and evidence trail

  • There is a clear change log before requesting another Google review.
  • Screenshots and examples exist for the main fixes made.
  • The next review request should reference specific changes, not vague compliance claims.
  • If the account is still inconsistent, delay review rather than burning another attempt.

  • 2. Trust, identity, and policy consistency

  • Business/contact details are visible, consistent, and plausible across the site.
  • Returns, shipping, privacy, and terms pages are present and easy to find.
  • Checkout path does not introduce surprise costs, hidden terms, or broken trust signals.
  • Product claims are supportable and do not look exaggerated or unsupported.

  • Evidence to request before final delivery

  • Merchant Center diagnostics screenshot showing the issue text and affected products.
  • 3-5 affected product URLs or SKUs.
  • Feed URL/export if available.
  • Screenshot or notes showing what was changed before the last review request.
  • Contact, returns, shipping, privacy, and terms page URLs where relevant.

  • Do not do

  • Do not invent GTINs, MPNs, brands, or compliance evidence.
  • Do not rewrite medical, financial, safety, or regulated claims without proof.
  • Do not request another review just because a page exists; request only after material cleanup.
  • Do not bulk-edit live product data until the repeated issue pattern is clear.

  • Recommended next step

    Do a manual sanity review of trust/policy evidence before sending the customer-facing report. Do not rush another review request until account-level consistency has been checked.


    Commercial fit

    Likely fit for audit plus possible done-for-you rescue if the store has clear evidence and fixable consistency gaps. Monitoring may fit after cleanup.