ComplaintsforCasetext

• Initial Complaint

  04/26/2024

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  I attempted to cancel a subscription with Casetest on 3/26 the same night I purchased it and realized that the service would not meet my needs. I successfully put in a cancellation through the site on 3/26. I never received a refund for the March 2024 bill of 2024. The cancellation was not processed and I was charged again for April 2024. I contacted Casetext and the representative told me that I could not cancel and I had to pay through 2025. In fact there is no way to cancel or remove my payment information from their site. This was both shocking and reveals that their practices are misleading and predatory. I would like the service to be cancelled and receive a full refund. Further I would like someone to look more closely into their practices as I have never heard of a company not allowing a customer to cancel on the same day.

  Business response

  05/09/2024

  Hello,

  Please note that despite the annual purchase agreement electronically signed and accepted prior to completing purchase, which requires monthly payments for the entire duration of the annual contract, our customer support team escalated your request of immediate cancellation. Your request was granted and refunds for both the months of March and April, the only months charged under your CoCounsel Core subscription, were refunded in full.

  With your request fully honored, please let us know if there is something else we might be able to assist you with at this time.

• Initial Complaint

  03/28/2024

  Complaint Type:

  Product Issues

  Status:

  Resolved

  More info

  Castext offers (what used to be) an **-assisted legal research service called CoCounsel. Casetext was recently acquired by ******* Reuters, the company that produces Westlaw. Casetext continues to sell CoCounsel subscriptions, but has removed all of the legal research features from CoCounsel in order to induce customers to purchase a much more expensive Westlaw subscription that does not include ** assisted legal research. This is not disclosed to purchasers of CoCounsel except in fine print at the bottom of the purchasing page. That fine print states that purchasers should acquire a Westlaw subscription to regain the ** assisted search capability. However, CoCounsel does not actually provide that functionality, even if the purchaser also has a Westlaw subscription. Casetext also refuses to allow customers to cancel their subscriptions upon discovering that the product does not do what it had been previously marketed to do. Nevertheless, their website makes false claims about continuing to be the leader in legal ** and being worthy of being trusted with substantive legal tasks, despite not being able to perform legal research at all. A lawyer trusting Casetext to perform a substantive legal task without doing any research is likely committing malpractice or ethical violations by doing so. Meanwhile, competitors like ***** ** can actually do these things.Casetext also requires that a customer canceling their subscription agree to a longer lock-up term (i.e., 2 years instead of 1 year) in order to change their payment information after requesting to cancel the subscription. No consideration, such as a discount, is given in return for the longer lock-up term. As no consideration was given, the contract is invalid and unenforceable.I request that Casetext cancel the subscription as requested and as their representative failed to do. They also need to pull the false claims about CoCounsel being capable of completing substantive legal tasks.

  Business response

  05/09/2024

  Hello *****,

  Thank you for taking the time to share your concerns with our customer support team upon your purchase of CoCounsel Core.

  We do make every effort to notify users of the ideal use cases of CoCounsel Core prior to purchase, which is why we 1) indicate on the pricing page sample functions of the ** as well as note that it does not include legal research capabilities (which you also noted) and 2) encourage firms to begin a free trial of CoCounsel Core prior to purchase from that same landing page.

  Additionally, upon further review of your exchange with our support staff, attached here for your convenience, we see both the confirmation that Westlaw Precision and CoCounsel Core can be used synergistically as one had previously experienced with CoCounsel All Access, as well as its ability to accept zipped files for its document review skills, which were your offered complaints regarding the product.

  And finally, our support team offered to escalate your cancellation request to management for further review if you were not pleased with this information. Our staff received no response or escalation acceptance. We then sent a follow-up email confirm you had received all this information the following day, which again received no reply. As such, our team closed the ticket and allowed your subscription to persist in accordance with the purchase agreement signed during checkout.

  At this time, and in the interest of seeing a material benefit to your practice, we would like to offer you a 1-on-1 training with an attorney **-expert in order to make valuable and optimal use of your CoCounsel Core access moving forward. Please feel welcome to contact us at ******************************** in order to set up this tailored workshopping session.

   

   

  Customer response

  05/10/2024

   
  Complaint: 21500863
  
  I am rejecting this response because: The training is worthless to me because I am thoroughly familiar with how to use CoCounsel for purposes other than research. The problem remains that without research, the other functions are rendered far less valuable because CoCounsel is not a specifically *legal* document processing system without that functionality, and yet is still marketed as such.
  

  For example, one of the use cases that the business has proposed is using CoCounsel to prepare for a deposition. Depositions, like any legal proceeding, must be conducted according to the rules of civil procedure. Without research functionality, CoCounsel cannot retrieve the rules and has zero idea what those rules are, meaning that it cannot be used for the intended purpose. It is effectively no different than stock GPT, which OpenAI makes available to everyone for free.

  I am now a ***** AI subscriber. For $330 a month, ***** offers the same functionality that CoCounsel once had, plus secondary research material for my home state, which Casetext has never had.

  Casetext needs to stop infantilizing their customers. They should know that not all attorneys who use their products are as nice as I am, and most of them wont just file a BBB complaint when they find theyve been ripped off.

  Just give me a refund already.

  
  Sincerely,
  
  *******************************

  Business response

  05/14/2024

  Hello *****,

  There are indeed ways to use your Westlaw Precision subscription alongside CoCounsel Core to complete all the same functions you had access to under the All Access plan. In truth, when it comes to breadth of use and access, the Core + Precision experience offers more than your previous package, which our trainers would have been glad to discuss with you.

  That said, we stand by our initial refund offer and have processed refunds for both your initial payment in March and April renewal. Your Core subscription has also been closed in order to prevent any further renewal charges.

  Thank you for partnership with Casetext up to this point; we sincerely wish you all the best with your AI-enablement needs moving forward!

  Customer response

  05/14/2024

  Better Business Bureau:
  
  I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me (so long as refunds are actually provided as promised.)
  

  Thank you for mediating in the dispute .

  
  Sincerely,
  
  *******************************

• Initial Complaint

  09/17/2023

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  the following link: ******************************************************* will be removed from your website effective immediately, this is information me about from A.I (artificial intelligence) which I did not agree with or too, to be published on casetext.com. I will not be used in any further proceedings and ****** declare a lawsuit against casetext. you will pay all student loans and life of mine totalling $5.5 Million for your false publication if you fail to comply, this is not a public concern. The decision of this case is not final until trial, the burden of proof is on the ****************. screen shot of case attached:

  Business response

  09/18/2023

  Hello,

  I can confirm that your removal request was received yesterday, September 17th, at 2:09 PM and received a response from our customer support staff at 2:10 PM. The response you received was as follows (names redacted for privacy):

  Hi ****,
  
  My name is ****, and I'm with the support team here at Casetext; thanks for reaching out! I completely understand your concern about the case being made public and would like to share with you why you see the case and the steps we've taken.
  
  To clarify why you're seeing your case, judicial opinions are public domain legal documents and are state and federal law. Therefore, Casetext's legal database includes millions of judicial orders and opinions from state and federal courts. If you were involved in a case in a jurisdiction that is included in our database, you may find your case on our site.
  
  We have submitted instructions to ****** and other search engines to stop listing the page (*******************************************************) in search results. This means that as soon as these websites update their information about our site, the page will not turn up as a result of any public search engine searches.
  
  Note that removing a page from public search engines can happen in a matter of days, but it sometimes takes longer. Unfortunately, there is nothing we can do on our end to speed along their process. But the process has been initiated, and the page will no longer be accessible through ****** and other search engines soon.
  
  Lastly, while we have submitted a request to have this link taken down from search engines, the case will remain in our database unless you can provide a sealed order. If you have a sealed order, please send it to us at ********************************, and we can take it down in our database.
  
  If you have any additional questions or concerns, please don't hesitate to ask.
  
  Thanks,
  ****

  ******************************************************

  You replied to this communication demanding immediate removal of the document in question, to which you were informed by both the customer support specialist and their direct manager that in order to remove documentation from our platform (beyond the de-indexing request submitted as a courtesy), a sealing or redaction order issued by a judge would be required.

  Please note that this requirement is still in effect. Given that the document in question is a matter of public record as issued by the court, one of the aforementioned orders would be required to remove the document from our database, which is relied upon by attorneys and law firms for the research of public case law. In the absence of such an order, please know that Casetext has provided all the assistance we can at this time. Otherwise, please feel welcome to submit the order requested to ******************************** for review and compliance, should one have been issued.

  Customer response

  09/18/2023

   
  Complaint: 20617147
  
  I am rejecting this response because:  judicial opinions are not public. It wasn't an order. Judicial opinions must be heard before a tribunal court in front of a jury, they are not fact until seen in front of a trial of my peers I choose. Opinions are not fact and are not orders, they are opinions. OPINIONS ARE NOT THE ****** I AM GOING TO NEED THE PHYSICAL ADDRESS TO SERVE PAPERWORK ON CASETEXT, BUT WAIT CASETEXT IN A.I (ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE) WHICH IS NOT INTELLIGENCE. 

   

  HAVE ************ CONTACT ME, I KNOW THE *** TOO... LET'S PLAY! 

  UNLESS YOU REMOVE THE INFORMATION WE'RE GOLDEN, UNTIL THEN I REJECT YOUR ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE!  I know casetext.com is using cloudflare servers and redact their contact information from the information i've seen.   who ever is behind casetext come forward so it's creator can be sued... 

   

  I AM FULLY REQUESTING THE *****S NAME OF CASE TEXT EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY, NOT THE MANAGER OR SUPERVISOR, OR AN EMPLOYEE...   

  GIVE ME THE NAME AND PHYSICAL MAILING ADDRESS OF THE ***** TODAY! 
  
  Sincerely,
  
  ********************************

  Business response

  09/20/2023

  Hello ******,

  
  To clarify, a judicial opinion is synonymous with a judicial decision. The document in question is the written disposition of the judge, which is issued in the public record, unless specific circumstances stipulate otherwise (in the absence of a sealing or redaction order, it is assumed that this document follows the accessibility standard of all other case law).

  
  While we have undergone efforts on your behalf to promote privacy in the form of submitting a de-indexing request of the document from all major search engines, we will be unable to delete or remove the case from our archives without the previously mentioned orders. At this juncture, we recommend you contact an attorney in your area to pursue a sealing or redaction order, which we will certainly be responsive to. Otherwise, we appreciate your understanding regarding the status of your document and the steps taken as a courtesy to best address your request.

  Customer response

  09/20/2023

   
  Complaint: 20617147
  
  I am rejecting this response because: you're argument is not working with me! a judicial order is not proven fact or public opinion, but don't worry I never lived in *******. Make sure you go back and tell people I have never met in my life or talked to... you don't even have my address and I am not going to stop until you remove from A.I system.   You will comply! 

   

  I need the physical address of casetext,  I know you're based in ********** and your company uses cloudflare as your DNS. I will release  this information to my private investigator to find your company, but I bet it doesn't even exist. You need to be served with papers and sued. YOU'RE NOT WINNING HERE. REMOVE MY NAME FROM YOUR SYSTEM NOW. 
  
  Sincerely,
  
  ********************************

• Initial Complaint

  08/16/2023

  Complaint Type:

  Product Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  Good Morning, Im writing to request the removal of:******************************************************************************************* from ****** searches and any other search engines, indexes.The above case states my full name and provides vivid details of a sexual harassment suit that was filed against a former employer. As a victim of sexual harassment in the workplace (regardless of the outcome of the case), I am constantly reminded of and traumatized by this incident every time my name is googled by a potential employer, student, parent, etc.As a victim, I have the right to some sort of anonymity. The posting of this case with my full name on display not only impacts me personally but, could also detour other victims of sexual harassment and/or assault from reporting incidents for fear of being on public display for the world to see.I emailed the site directly on 08/15/23, to make this request but have not received a response. ****** stated that they are the only ones that can remove it.Im requesting the immediate removal of this information or at a minimum the removal of my name under the Victims Rights Law in order to preserve my privacy and dignity.

  Business response

  08/17/2023

  Hello, ***. Thank you for reaching out!

  Upon review of our contact records, we were unable to find any email originating from the email address you provided. We would be interested to know if your request was sent to ********************************* which is where de-indexing requests are received and processed within 24 hours of submission.

  That said, with the required information being supplied by you here, we have submitted instructions to ****** and other search engines to stop listing the page *************************************************************************************************** search results. This means that as soon as these websites update their information about our site, the page will not turn up as a result in any public search engine searches.
  
  Note that removing a page from public search engines can happen in a matter of days, but it sometimes takes longer. Unfortunately, there is nothing we can do on our end to speed along their process. But the process has been initiated and the page will no longer be accessible through ****** soon.

  Thank you for allowing us to address this matter for you directly; we wish you all the best moving forward!

• Initial Complaint

  08/05/2023

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  From about **** I begin litigating in ************* District court because of some some circumstances that were not fortunate.Casetext has I dont know how long has copied every case from Pacer or wherever they got them from I dont know but I did not give Casetext permission to copy any of my cases on their site or the internet they have copied about almost 137 cases.I would like for Casetext to take down every case with my name on it or anything with my name on their site or on the internet.Cases in the courts are public info but a business cannot post anything with a persons name they did not give them permission to Casetext is using my name for business person and including them with their packages for sale some packages of case are about $600 a month.I ask Casetext to also give me $250,000 to settle this matter which is generous nothing that for about ten years my name and cases have been along with their for profit packages making them probably billions a year.If Casetext wants to keep using my cases along with their packages we can work out a deal, but if not hault all of my cases being put on their sites and pay me whether pacer is charging or not for my cases is not the issue, but using my cases on their site is making them a profit because when a person sees my case people link on and go to more case text case and then purchase their packages that make them billions.Now I have known about this for years and did nothing but it is time to pay and or make a deal or deal with it in the courts.A company can not use a person name or likeness without their consent at all now a person can site cases in court but cannot use them as part o their business

  Business response

  08/07/2023

  As the individual states, the records on Casetext are part of the public record, which allow the documents to be displayed for public view and use. Where the individual is incorrect is that Casetext charges for access to the case law on our platform. All of Casetext's judicial opinions are freely accessible to the public. It is the additional research tools used to find and organize their research, generally preferred for use by legal professionals, that come in the form of a subscription.

  Given that the case law on Casetext's platform is a matter of public record, we would require a copy of a sealing order or a redaction order to be sent to ******************************** in order to process a removal of any applicable documentation. Otherwise, as a courtesy, we would be happy to submit a de-indexing request on behalf the individual to all major search engines, should they contact Casetext at ******************************** with the Casetext URL's associated with the cases to which they are party on our platform.

  Customer response

  08/07/2023

   
  Complaint: 20428889
  
  I am rejecting this response because:
  
  Sincerely,
  
  ***********************************

  You know and I know I did not give your company the right anything with my name on the internet you are not the government before a business post anyone's name on the internet they have to get their permission and have not given Casetext permission to post my name on the internet you are using my name and people's name to sell your packages I know what you are doing you post people's case to attract people to your site then they buy your packages making millions this is deceptive trade practice which is prohibited by the consumer protection office of every state in the **, and and by the **** and by federal statute a business cannot use anyone's name or likeness for their business without that person's permission whether it  is non-profit or a profit business court case are for the public to use to note when filing a pleading in a case not for a business to post on the internet for any kind non-profit or non-profit now I as again for Casetext to take down all of my info off the internet and from your Catalog, and or compensate me and or make a deal with me if you want to keep my info on your site the ********** of ******* has federal fined and shutdown companies for downloading people's cases and posting them on the internet Casetext is not the ****************** and I am not going to allow your business to use my cases or name anymore without paying me compensation. This is non-negotionable.

  Business response

  08/08/2023

  You are welcome to submit your request directly to our legal department at ******************************* That said, again, we do not sell case law, which is freely accessible to the public on Casetext. Rather, we allow the purchase of subscriptions that make the research of the law more convenient and practical for legal work.

  At this juncture, Casetext has offered to, and has issued, a de-indexing request on your behalf for the case in question as a courtesy, given that your case is a matter of public record. We unfortunately cannot take any further action without a sealing order or redaction order concerning the document in question.

  Customer response

  08/08/2023

   
  Complaint: 20428889
  
  I am rejecting this response because:
  
  Sincerely,
  
  ***********************************

  To the business: are you telling me you have been using my name on your site for at least ten years without my permission as part of your business and you are not going to give me one dime from a profitable business and more you don't believe you did anything wrong.

  Business response

  08/09/2023

  We regret to inform you that we are unable to assist you in this matter to any further degree without a sealing order or redaction order to abide by. We are more than happy to take proactive steps in order to protect the privacy and requests of those whose public records are archived for legal research purposes, which we have done on your behalf here, but cannot provide any additional action or commentary on this matter. Thank you for your understanding.

• Initial Complaint

  08/04/2023

  Complaint Type:

  Service or Repair Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  I have requested for this company to remove my case from coming up on search engines since March 2023 and as of today 8/3/2023, the search results from this company is still coming up on the very top of the page, the court documents on this page shows my personal information and they are not removing this.

  Business response

  08/04/2023

  Please find attached the communication record on file in which you requested the removal of separate and unique document links in the months of March and April.

  We have confirmed that all requested links were submitted for de-indexing to ****** and all other major search engines upon request; this is a process we offered as a courtesy, being that the documents in question are among public record and are stored on our platform for legal research purposes.

  While Casetext does not have the final authority in processing these de-indexing requests (which are ultimately up to the search engines), we have taken these actions on your behalf in both March and April as well as more recently when you requested additional de-indexing actions by our team in August.

  If you would like further action to be taken by our team regarding the accessibility of the documents/links in question, we ask that you provide our team with the previously requested sealing order or redaction order that would allow us to remove these documents in their entirety. In the absence of such an order, we have done all that is possible in order to satisfy your requests.
  

  Customer response

  08/04/2023

   
  Complaint: 20421317
  
  I am rejecting this response because: even though these are public records, it doesnt mean anyone can search it on the internet search just by entering my name or phone number.  These court records are only coming up from your site.  And my records keep reappearing from the search engines even thoughI have previously asked to be removed from search engines.
  
  Sincerely,
  
  ***********************

  Business response

  08/07/2023

  When entering into search engines, such as ******* the name of the individual, none of the links requested for removal/de-indexing were populated. Instead, the document *************************************************************************************************************** was the only one to populate. This link was never requested for de-indexing; despite this, we have submitted this link for de-indexing of our own initiative. We must note that it is beyond the scope of Casetext's support staff to look for all potential documents in which the individual's name might be mentioned and instead rely on the specific requests of the individual in order to initiate these de-indexing processes, which we again must remind are offered as a courtesy if no sealing order or redaction order apply to the document (which have been requested of the individual and never supplied).

  Also, as a final point of clarification, if a name or any identifying information is included in a document of public record without any order of redaction issued then that document is and should be viewable in the form issued by the court.

  Customer response

  08/07/2023

   
  Complaint: 20421317
  
  I am rejecting this response because: when seaching my phone number, the civil case cover sheet is now showing up on the result. Which shows my full name, phone number address and signature. 
  
  Sincerely,
  
  ***********************

  Business response

  08/08/2023

  As we have previously indicated, we only have the ability to request the de-indexing of specific Casetext URLs, which must then be processed by the search engines when updating their information about our website (meaning once the request is submitted, it is up to the search engine to finalize the request). If the search engine has not processed the request, then the contents of that URL (or the document associated with it) would still be searchable via their engine.

  Given that we have already submitted de-indexing requests for all requested URLs (and one extra of our own accord), the only way to prevent this information from appearing in its entirety would be to submit to our support staff at ******************************** a copy of an applicable sealing order or redaction order, as previously requested, so that the document may be amended or removed in its entirety. Short of this, we have done all that we are able to do as a matter of courtesy.

• Initial Complaint

  05/02/2023

  Complaint Type:

  Product Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  I asked several times to remove my case from your website and I never received any reply. Remove my information from your database.****************************************************************************************

  Business response

  06/09/2023

  I have been notified of a recent BBB complaint issued on 5/12 under the ID 20007488.

  
  We would be interested in addressing this complaint, as the individual's claim is incorrect: "I asked several times to remove my case from your website and I never received any reply. Remove my information from your database. ****************************************************************************************

  **** Equal Emp't ********************* ****************** Case No.: 5:11-CV-04796 EJD | Casetext Search + Citator Read **** Equal Emp't ********************* ****************** Case No.: 5:11-CV-04796 EJD, see flags on bad law, and search Casetexts comprehensive legal database casetext.com

  "

  
  Rather, one minute after the request was received on May 2, at 9:31 AM, an agent of support replied to the user after having completed a de-indexing action on the user's behalf, to which they did not respond:
  
  Hi Lahouari.

   

  Thank you for reaching out to ** about this.  I understand your concern and can definitely help get this taken care of for you!

   

  We have submitted instructions to ****** and other search engines to stop listing the page in search results. This means that as soon as these websites update their information about our site, the page will not turn up as a result in any public search engine searches. 

   

  Note that removing a page from public search engines can happen in a matter of days, but it sometimes takes longer. Unfortunately, there is nothing we can do on our end to speed along their process. But the process has been initiated and the page will no longer be accessible through ****** soon.

   

  Please let ** know if you have any questions!

   

  *****"

• Initial Complaint

  12/29/2022

  Complaint Type:

  Sales and Advertising Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  I do not authorize you to sell my information for profit. You are violating my privacy by publishing these records with the intent of profiting. I would like you to remove my name and cases from your site. I am a CA resident.

  Business response

  01/24/2023

  Regarding Complaint ID #:********, issued by ******************************* (*****************), we have no history of contact under that email address to our support staff. Like the complaint above, this appears to be a simple matter of a de-indexing request. Should the individual be able to provide us with the Casetext URL associated with the case in question, our support staff would be happy to submit a de-indexing request on the individual's behalf immediately (with the understanding that it takes the search engines, primarily ******* approximately **** business days to comply).

  Customer response

  01/24/2023

  Better Business Bureau:
  
  I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me provided they remove my name from this **************************************************************; If they do not, I am not in agreement.

  
  Sincerely,
  
  *******************************

  Business response

  01/25/2023

  The judicial opinion in question, ********************************************************, has been submitted for de-indexing and will be removed from the publicly displayed results of all major search engines, including ******* Please allow **** business days for this removal to go into effect as these entities update their statuses regarding our company.

   

  In regards to altering the judicial opinion itself, as a matter of public record and law, we are unable to redact or otherwise change the content of the document without a redaction order or a new version of the case that has been published by the court. Should you have such an order or revised copy available, please send this to ******************************** for immediate review and compliance. Otherwise, given the steps taken above to conceal this matter of public record as a courtesy, we hope you can find this resolution as equally acceptable.
  

• Initial Complaint

  07/23/2022

  Complaint Type:

  Sales and Advertising Issues

  Status:

  Answered

  More info

  RE: Cease and Desist All Defamatory Statements of *********************************** Reputation and Character ****** is informed and believes that CaseText has been, and continues to be, engaged in defamation per se, and placing ***************************** in a false light, and other tortious activities as more fully described below. CaseText's actions must cease immediately and be corrected before ****** suffers further harm.Please place a no index instruction on this case. Once the instruction is implemented by the search engines, this case will be prevented from showing ** in public search results accessing the site. I am also requesting that you redact my name. I already requested a public records removal request through CaseText and was denied.Applicable law provides remedies for such conduct. For example, ********** law provides recovery for defamation involving false statements of fact that have a tendency to injure an individual. Additionally, a claim for false light exists in which a publication puts an individual or entity in a false position in the public's view.

  Business response

  01/24/2023

  Please see the attached.

  Regarding Complaint ID #: ********, ********************* (*******************), requested both a de-indexing of a case as well as redaction of her name from said case. Prior to this complaint being submitted with the BBB, the individual contacted Casetext with these requests. Unfortunately, the individual was not issued or did not supply to our support staff, despite our request, for proof of an order of redaction or seal, which is required to alter case law as it is dispensed by the court. Without this official documentation, we are and were unable to address this portion of ****'s request. However, as a courtesy, we did in fact immediately process the de-indexing of the case, and informed the individual of this action.

  
  Please find attached the transcript of the exchange between **** and our staff (casetext_2022_07_23_43558600187494) supporting the evidence supplied above.

*Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business. ↩