An old conviction follows you everywhere

You were convicted years ago, served your sentence, and have completely rebuilt your life – but a Google search still shows the newspaper report. We have removed hundreds of conviction-related pages, including spent convictions, not guilty verdicts, discontinued proceedings, and foreign convictions that should not appear in UK search results.

An article about you is the first Google result

A news article, a forum post, a review site, or a social media thread dominates your Google results. It could be years old. It could be misleading. It could be from a publication that has already said no to a take-down request. We know which arguments work, which publishers respond, and which routes open doors that were previously closed.

A content removal company has already tried and failed

Many of our clients come to us after another firm or content removal service has attempted a take-down and been refused. That is not the end. A solicitor brings legal tools that a content removal company simply does not have – including the ability to send letters with genuine legal consequences, escalate to the ICO, and issue court proceedings.

You want to remove a disciplinary or professional record

An MPTS decision, an SDT ruling, a complaint outcome, or a professional discipline record that still comes up in a Google search of your name. We have acted for regulated professionals across medicine, law, finance, and teaching. Where the sanction has been served and your career is back on track, there are strong arguments for removal.

Your content is on an overseas website

The content is on a US website, an Australian news site, or a platform hosted in the EU. Google can still delist it from UK search results under UK GDPR. We also pursue direct removal from international publishers where that is the more effective route. Cross-border cases are part of our day-to-day work.

Google has already refused your request

You submitted the Google RTBF form yourself and were refused. That refusal is not the end – it is information. We look at why the request was refused, whether the legal argument can be reframed, whether a different route (ICO, court, direct to publisher) is more effective, and whether a solicitor’s involvement changes the dynamic. In many cases, it does.

You are a public figure or entrepreneur

Being known does not mean giving up your right to privacy. We act for entrepreneurs, Sunday Times Rich List individuals, and celebrities. The public interest test is higher but not insurmountable – particularly where the content is outdated, personal rather than professional, or causes disproportionate harm to your private life.

Your situation is sensitive or embarrassing

Sexual allegations, intimate images, divorce proceedings, addiction, mental health. Whatever the nature of the content, we have seen it before. Every assessment is confidential, covered by legal professional privilege from the first contact, and handled without judgement. Whatever you are dealing with, you can speak openly.

We have legal leverage over Google

As a law firm with an excellent reputation in this field, we have legal leverage that other content removal companies simply do not have. As qualified solicitors, we can do things a content removal company cannot. We send letters that carry genuine legal consequences. We can issue court proceedings. We can make formal ICO complaints that are taken seriously because they come from a regulated law firm with a track record. That leverage changes the dynamic of every negotiation with Google.

We know how Google thinks

After 25 years, we know that Google often just needs you to come at the problem from a different angle. A request refused on one legal argument can succeed on another. A new precedent, a shift in how the case is framed, a different supporting argument – these are the things that turn a Google refusal into a removal notice.

We do not stop at the first refusal

Most firms treat a Google rejection as the end. We treat it as information. We revisit the case, look for new angles, consider whether the law has shifted – and think outside the box. Some of our best results – including the 1,017-page removal for Chris – came on the third or fourth attempt, after building a deeper understanding of why earlier approaches had not worked.

Our relationships open doors

We know Google’s in-house legal team. We know the editors and lawyers at the national newspapers. Relationships built over decades mean our letters are read, our calls are returned, and our arguments get a proper hearing from the start.

Can you remove content from Google?

Yes. Content can be removed from Google in two ways: delisting (Google removes the link from its search results, but the page stays on the publisher’s website) and deletion (the content is removed from the source). We pursue whichever approach is right for your case – and often both simultaneously. We have removed over 1,000 pages for a single client and have a track record across virtually every content type and publication.

How do I know if my content can be removed from Google?

That is exactly what the free Expert Assessment is for. A solicitor reviews your specific URLs and the facts of your situation, applies the legal tests under UK GDPR and recent case law, and gives you an honest assessment of whether there is a route to removal – and what it involves. It is free, takes about 15 minutes, and carries no obligation.

How long does it take to remove content from Google?

It varies considerably. We have had content removed from Google within 24 hours where the right argument reached the right person quickly. At the other end, the most stubborn cases – resistant publishers, older articles, foreign content – can take a couple of years of sustained legal work. We give you a realistic expected timeline with the written quote before any work begins.

What if Google has already refused my removal request?

A Google refusal is not the end. It is information. We look at the specific refusal, consider whether the legal argument can be reframed or strengthened, and decide whether to resubmit to Google with better arguments, escalate to the ICO, approach the publisher directly, or issue court proceedings. Many of our best results came on cases where Google had already refused an earlier request.

Should I submit a Google removal request myself before contacting you?

We would generally advise against submitting a DIY request without legal advice first. If the request is refused, Google’s refusal becomes part of the record and can make escalation harder. For complex cases, the first submission is your best opportunity to put the strongest possible argument. Let us assess the case first – the assessment is free – and we will tell you whether the DIY route is likely to work.

Can content on an overseas website be removed from Google?

Yes. We regularly handle cross-border cases. Content published in the US, Australia, Canada, or anywhere in the EU can be delisted from Google’s UK and global search results under UK GDPR. We also pursue direct removal from international publishers where that is the more effective route.

What is the difference between right to be forgotten and content removal?

The right to be forgotten (RTBF) is the legal right under UK GDPR to request that a search engine delist links to content about you – the content stays on the source website but no longer appears in search results. Content removal goes further: it targets the source directly. Many of our cases involve both, pursued in parallel or in sequence.

Will my enquiry be kept confidential?

Yes, absolutely. Your enquiry is protected by legal professional privilege from the moment you first contact us. We will never share your details, discuss your situation with third parties, or refer to your case publicly without your explicit permission.

What happens in the free Expert Assessment?

A qualified internet law solicitor calls you. You tell them what you want removed from Google and provide the URLs. They assess the legal basis for removal, the likely approach, and give you an honest view of your chances. The call takes about 15 minutes. Within 48 hours, you receive a written case review and a fixed-fee quote. No commitment, no pressure.

How much does it cost to remove content from Google?

Standard cases start from £1,000 + VAT, with a fixed fee quoted in writing before any work starts. Complex cases – multiple pages, resistant publishers, ICO escalation, or international content – start from £5,000 + VAT. The Expert Assessment itself is completely free.

What if you tell me you cannot help?

We tell you honestly. One of our clients noted: “Refreshingly – for a lawyer – Yair Cohen advised me not to hire him in this instance as it would not be a good investment.” If the content cannot be removed or the prospects are too uncertain to justify the cost, we say so. That is the kind of firm we are.

Can I remove a spent conviction from Google?

Yes, in many cases. Once a conviction is spent under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act, the argument for removing it from Google becomes significantly stronger. The passage of time, the nature of the offence, and your rehabilitation all factor into Google’s assessment. We have removed hundreds of conviction-related pages.

Can I remove a news article about a case where I was found not guilty?

This is one of the strongest categories for removal. Articles reporting charges where you were acquitted, or where proceedings were discontinued, can often be delisted on the basis that they are inaccurate or no longer relevant. The fact the article remains on Google despite an acquittal is exactly the harm the right to be forgotten was designed to address.

Can I remove court records and tribunal listings from Google?

Google can delist links to court records and tribunal decisions from its search results. Whether it will depends on the nature of the case, how old it is, and the public interest arguments. We handle these applications regularly, including MPTS decisions, SDT rulings, and County Court judgments.

Can I remove images of me from Google search results?

Yes. Google has specific processes for image delisting, and there are additional legal routes for intimate images, deepfakes, and photographs published without your consent. We handle both the Google delisting request and, where necessary, direct legal action against the publisher or platform.

Can I remove social media posts about me from Google?

Yes. Social media content on Facebook, X, Instagram, Reddit, LinkedIn, TikTok, and forums can be addressed through a combination of platform reporting, RTBF requests to Google, and where necessary, legal action against the poster or platform itself.

Can I remove Google autocomplete suggestions that link my name to negative content?

Yes. Google autocomplete suggestions that are defamatory, misleading, or link your name to irrelevant negative content can be challenged and removed. We have successfully removed autocomplete suggestions for a range of clients.

Can I remove doxxing content from Google?

Yes. Doxxing – the publication of private personal information such as home addresses, phone numbers, or family details – is a clear basis for removal. We act quickly in these cases given the personal safety implications.

★★★★★

“Your assistance and guidance is far beyond the value of any fees paid.”

Chris – 1,017 pages removed from Google

★★★★★

“Giving my family, in particular my sons, a more stress free normal life… you have given us our lives back.”

Eric – 3 pages removed

★★★★★

The ICO accepted “most if not all of the very cogent arguments” we put forward.

Diego – 28 pages removed, ICO case won

★★★★★

“Excellent solicitors, very professional and delivered wonderful results.”

Martin – 13 pages removed

★★★★★

“Excellent, professional service delivered within a tight timeline. Have used twice and will use again.”

Thomas – 4 pages, repeat client

★★★★★

“I hope never to need their services again but I would recommend them without hesitation.”

Edwin – New York, 2 pages

★★★★★

“I have found your fantastic team of internet lawyers incredibly helpful, robust and hugely knowledgeable. You are certainly a safe pair of hands to be in during difficult times.”

David Baum

★★★★★

“Refreshingly – for a lawyer – Yair Cohen advised me not to hire him in this instance as it would not be a good investment of time and money.”

Honest advice – we tell you if we cannot help

★★★★★

“Your team and professional services are excellent and I actually really enjoyed my conversation with the solicitor.”

Mrs S.L

★★★★★

“I am absolutely delighted about the outcome of my right to be forgotten application. This exercise requires considerable expertise and I am totally pleased with the outcome.”

Right to be forgotten client

★★★★★

“The result has been fantastic and the best I could have hoped for. I was very distressed by the situation I found myself in and Cohen Davis were brilliant.”

Dr B.Y – Bradford

★★★★★

“I have been very pleased with the services provided by Cohen Davis. Their team have acted very professionally and the outcome has been very satisfactory.”

Mr E.P – Jersey, Channel Islands

★★★★★

“From start to finish very refreshing. Friendly, efficient, professional and very informative.”

Verified client

★★★★★

“Sara, Richard, Paul and Eva were a fantastic team. Knowledgeable, responsive and extremely helpful throughout.”

International client – New York

★★★★★

“Thank you Yair for an excellent service. Your attention to detail and approachable staff are an asset to the firm.”

Elliot Crego

Free 15-minute Expert Assessment

A qualified internet law solicitor reviews your URLs and situation, applies the legal tests, and tells you honestly whether your content can be removed from Google and how.

Written Case Review and Fixed-Fee Quote

Within 48 hours, you receive a written review of your case and a fixed-fee quote. Valid for 14 days. You decide whether to proceed.

We act – and we persist

If you instruct us, we begin work immediately. Named solicitor, clear communication, and a legal team that does not stop at the first Google refusal.

Your home address is visible in Google results

A search of your name reveals your home address – from an unofficial electoral roll listing, a directory site, a Companies House filing, or a data broker. For anyone with a stalker, a difficult ex-partner, a security concern, or simply a right to live privately, this is not an abstract risk. We have removed hundreds of address disclosures from Google results.

You have been doxxed

Private personal information – your address, your phone number, your workplace, your family members’ names – has been deliberately published online to harass or intimidate you. The content may be on forums, social media, paste sites, or specialist harassment platforms. We act quickly on doxxing cases given the personal safety implications, and we pursue removal from both the source and from Google’s search results.

An old financial record keeps appearing

A CCJ that has been satisfied, a bankruptcy that was discharged, an IVA that ended years ago, a dissolved company you had no control over – financial records from the past that continue to dominate your Google results long after they are legally spent. We have helped many clients remove these records or delist them from search results, particularly where the financial difficulty has passed and the ongoing prominence of the record is disproportionate.

Personal data is appearing on data broker sites

Sites such as 192.com, Spokeo, BeenVerified, Whitepages, and many others aggregate and publish personal information drawn from public records. These profiles often appear prominently in Google results. We address these cases at two levels: requesting removal from the data broker directly, and pursuing delisting from Google under UK GDPR.

Medical or health information has been published

Health information is among the most sensitive categories of personal data under UK GDPR. Whether it appeared in court proceedings, a news article, a social media post, or a forum, there are strong legal arguments for its removal. The bar for a publisher to justify retaining medical information in Google results is high.

Information about your family is exposed

Your children’s names, your spouse or partner’s details, your parents’ information – personal family data that has been published without consent and that now appears when someone searches your name. Where children are involved, we treat the case with particular urgency.

Google has already refused your removal request

You submitted the Google RTBF form or a data subject access request and were refused. That refusal is not the end – it is information. We look at why the request was refused, whether the legal argument can be strengthened, whether the ICO is the right next step, and whether a different legal route is more effective. In many cases, a solicitor’s involvement changes the outcome.

Your situation is sensitive or embarrassing

Personal information does not need to be dramatic to be harmful. Old addresses, past relationships, former employers, health matters, financial difficulties – whatever the information, we have seen it before. Every assessment is confidential, covered by legal professional privilege from the first contact, and handled without judgement.

We have legal leverage over Google

As a law firm with an excellent reputation in this field, we have legal leverage that other content removal companies simply do not have. As qualified solicitors, we can do things a removal company cannot. We send letters that carry genuine legal consequences. We can issue court proceedings. We can make formal ICO complaints that are taken seriously because they come from a regulated law firm with a track record. That leverage changes the dynamic of every negotiation with Google.

We know UK GDPR and privacy law inside out

Personal information removal is primarily a data protection and a privacy law matter. Privacy law is mainly a common law issue – one that is more familiar to specialist lawyers than to many content removal companies. If you are not working with a specialist law firm, you may be missing an important trick. We know exactly which provisions of UK GDPR apply to each type of personal data, which privacy law arguments carry the most weight, and how to frame the argument so the ICO and the courts take it seriously. That legal precision is what turns a standard request into a removal notice.

We do not stop at the first refusal

Most firms treat a Google rejection as the end. We treat it as information. We revisit the case, look for new angles, consider whether the law has shifted – and think outside the box. Some of our best results came on the third or fourth attempt, after building a deeper understanding of why earlier approaches had not worked.

Our relationships open doors

We know Google’s in-house legal team. We know the editors and lawyers at the national newspapers. Relationships built over decades mean our letters are read, our calls are returned, and our arguments get a proper hearing from the start.

Can you remove personal information from Google?

Yes. Personal information can be removed from Google in two ways: delisting (Google removes the link from its search results) and deletion (the content is removed at source). Under UK GDPR, individuals have the right to request erasure of personal data that is no longer necessary, inaccurate, or processed unlawfully. We pursue whichever approach is right for your case – and often both simultaneously.

How do I know if my personal information can be removed?

That is exactly what the free Expert Assessment is for. A solicitor reviews your specific URLs and the facts of your situation, applies the legal tests under UK GDPR, and gives you an honest assessment of whether there is a route to removal. It is free, takes about 15 minutes, and carries no obligation.

What legal basis is used to remove personal information from Google?

The primary basis is the UK GDPR right to erasure (Article 17) – often called the “right to be forgotten”. Additional grounds include the right to object to processing (Article 21), data minimisation principles, and the prohibition on processing special category data (such as health information or criminal records) without a valid lawful basis. Privacy law – as a common law matter – provides a further important ground in cases involving misuse of private information, and is frequently overlooked by those unfamiliar with it. In some cases, defamation law or the Data Protection Act 2018 provide additional routes.

What if Google has already refused my request to remove personal information?

A Google refusal is not the end. It is information. We look at the specific refusal, consider whether the legal argument can be reframed or strengthened, and decide whether to resubmit to Google, escalate to the ICO, approach the publisher directly, or issue court proceedings. Many of our best results came on cases where Google had already refused an earlier request.

Can I remove my address or phone number from Google search results?

Yes, in many cases. Contact details such as home addresses and phone numbers are personal data. Where their continued publication is unnecessary, inaccurate, or poses a risk to your safety, they can be delisted from Google and, in many cases, removed from the source. We have handled many cases involving address and contact detail disclosure, including urgent cases involving personal safety risks.

Can personal information on an overseas website be removed from Google?

Yes. Content published in the US, Australia, Canada, or anywhere in the EU can be delisted from Google’s UK search results under UK GDPR. We also pursue direct removal from international publishers where that is the more effective route. Cross-border cases are a regular part of our work.

How long does it take to remove personal information from Google?

It varies considerably. We have had information delisted within 24 hours where the right argument reached the right person quickly. At the other end, complex cases involving resistant publishers or sensitive legal issues can take longer. We give you a realistic expected timeline with the written quote before any work begins.

Will my enquiry be kept confidential?

Yes, absolutely. Your enquiry is protected by legal professional privilege from the moment you first contact us. We will never share your details, discuss your situation with third parties, or refer to your case publicly without your explicit permission.

Can you remove personal information from websites based in the USA or Canada?

Yes. We work with a dedicated specialist network of attorneys in the United States and Canada, many of whom act for some of the most prominent platforms and are deeply familiar with how those platforms operate from the inside. That network gives us routes to removal that a UK-only firm simply does not have. In some cases, a single well-placed call from an attorney with an established relationship with a platform has resulted in the removal of scores of posts on a US-based consumer review website – quickly and without litigation. In other cases we apply both UK and US law in tandem to achieve results that neither jurisdiction could deliver alone. If the content you want removed is hosted by a US or Canadian platform, tell us in the assessment form and we will advise on the best route.

Can I remove my information from 192.com, Spokeo, or similar data broker sites?

Yes. Many data broker sites aggregate personal information from public records and publish it without the individual’s consent. Under UK GDPR, you have the right to object to this processing and to request erasure. We address these cases at two levels: direct removal from the broker, and delisting of the broker’s profile page from Google search results.

Can I remove my information from electoral roll listings on Google?

Electoral roll data is technically public, but its aggregation and publication by third-party sites – particularly where it exposes your current home address – is not always lawful. We assess the specific publication and advise on the best route: opt-out from the open register, removal request to the publisher, or delisting from Google under GDPR.

Can I remove my name from Companies House results on Google?

Companies House records are a matter of public record and cannot be suppressed at source. However, Google can delist specific Companies House pages from search results where the information is outdated or causes disproportionate harm relative to the public interest in its availability. We assess these cases individually, particularly where a dissolved company or an old directorship continues to dominate search results.

Can I remove a CCJ or bankruptcy record from Google?

Google can delist links to CCJ, bankruptcy, and insolvency records from its search results. Whether it will depends on how old the record is, whether the matter has been resolved, and the public interest arguments. Satisfied CCJs and discharged bankruptcies are among the most successfully removed financial records we handle.

Can I remove health or medical information from Google?

Health information is “special category” personal data under UK GDPR and carries the highest level of legal protection. Its publication without a lawful basis is a serious breach. Where health information has appeared in news articles, court reports, or online posts, we have strong grounds for both deletion at source and delisting from Google.

Can I remove doxxing content from Google?

Yes. Doxxing – the deliberate publication of private personal information such as home addresses, phone numbers, or family details to cause distress or enable harassment – is a clear basis for removal under both data protection law and the Online Safety Act. We act quickly in these cases given the personal safety implications.

What happens in the free Expert Assessment?

A qualified internet law solicitor calls you. You tell them what you want removed from Google and provide the URLs. They assess the legal basis for removal, the likely approach, and give you an honest view of your chances. The call takes about 15 minutes. Within 48 hours, you receive a written case review and a fixed-fee quote. No commitment, no pressure.

How much does it cost to remove personal information from Google?

Standard cases start from £1,000 + VAT, with a fixed fee quoted in writing before any work starts. Complex cases – multiple records, resistant publishers, ICO escalation, or international content – start from £5,000 + VAT. The Expert Assessment itself is completely free.

What if you tell me you cannot help?

We tell you honestly. One of our clients noted: “Refreshingly – for a lawyer – Yair Cohen advised me not to hire him in this instance as it would not be a good investment.” If the personal information cannot be removed or are too uncertain to justify the cost, we say so. That is the kind of firm we are.

★ύ33;★★★

“Your assistance and guidance is far beyond the value of any fees paid.”

Chris – 1,017 pages removed from Google

★★★★★

“Giving my family, in particular my sons, a more stress free normal life… you have given us our lives back.”

Eric – 3 pages removed

★★★★★

The ICO accepted “most if not all of the very cogent arguments” we put forward.

Diego – 28 pages removed, ICO case won

★★★★★

“Excellent solicitors, very professional and delivered wonderful results.”

Martin – 13 pages removed

★★★★★

“Excellent, professional service delivered within a tight timeline. Have used twice and will use again.”

Thomas – 4 pages, repeat client

★★★★★

“I hope never to need their services again but I would recommend them without hesitation.”

Edwin – New York, 2 pages

★★★★★

“I have found your fantastic team of internet lawyers incredibly helpful, robust and hugely knowledgeable. You are certainly a safe pair of hands to be in during difficult times.”

David Baum

★★★★★

“Refreshingly – for a lawyer – Yair Cohen advised me not to hire him in this instance as it would not be a good investment of time and money.”

Honest advice – we tell you if we cannot help

★★★★★

“Your team and professional services are excellent and I actually really enjoyed my conversation with the solicitor.”

Mrs S.L

★★★★★

“I am absolutely delighted about the outcome of my right to be forgotten application. This exercise requires considerable expertise and I am totally pleased with the outcome.”

Right to be forgotten client

★★★★★

“The result has been fantastic and the best I could have hoped for. I was very distressed by the situation I found myself in and Cohen Davis were brilliant.”

Dr B.Y – Bradford

★★★★★

“I have been very pleased with the services provided by Cohen Davis. Their team have acted very professionally and the outcome has been very satisfactory.”

Mr E.P – Jersey, Channel Islands

★★★★★

“From start to finish very refreshing. Friendly, efficient, professional and very informative.”

Verified client

★★★★★

“Sara, Richard, Paul and Eva were a fantastic team. Knowledgeable, responsive and extremely helpful throughout.”

International client – New York

★★★★★

“Thank you Yair for an excellent service. Your attention to detail and approachable staff are an asset to the firm.”

Elliot Crego

Free 15-minute Expert Assessment

A qualified internet law solicitor reviews your URLs and situation, applies the legal tests, and tells you honestly whether your personal information can be removed from Google and how.

Written Case Review and Fixed-Fee Quote

Within 48 hours, you receive a written review of your case and a fixed-fee quote. Valid for 14 days. You decide whether to proceed.

We act – and we persist

If you instruct us, we begin work immediately. Named solicitor, clear communication, and a legal team that does not stop at the first Google refusal.

Content on Reddit, X, Facebook, and other platforms that indexes in Google – often long after the original post has been forgotten by its author.

Personal photos published without consent, or images from old news coverage that continue to surface in Google Images alongside your name.

Inaccurate or outdated personal information in Google’s own knowledge panels – corrected through the proper editorial and legal channels.

False or defamatory reviews on Google, Trustpilot, Glassdoor and similar platforms – where the legal threshold for removal is met.

Historical findings from regulatory bodies that are now spent or resolved and no longer serve any legitimate public interest.

Dissolved company information, former directorships, and Companies House entries that continue to affect your personal reputation online.

Google has already refused your removal request

You submitted Google’s RTBF form and received a refusal. Many people stop here. They should not. A refusal from Google is not a legal determination – it is a business decision that can be challenged. We look at the grounds for refusal, construct the strongest legal counter-argument, escalate to the ICO if appropriate, and in appropriate cases issue court proceedings. We overturn Google refusals regularly.

A spent conviction is still appearing in Google

A criminal record that is legally spent under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act continues to dominate your Google results. An employer, a new business contact, or a new partner searches your name and finds it. Under UK GDPR, the continued prominence of a spent conviction in search results is exactly the type of interference the right to be forgotten was designed to address. These cases have strong legal foundations.

A news article from years ago still ranks highly

A court report, a news story, a local paper article, or a press release from years ago continues to appear at the top of Google when someone searches your name. The events it describes are long past. You have moved on. But the article has not. We examine the legal position around that specific article – the publication, the nature of the content, and the current public interest arguments – and pursue the strongest available route to delisting.

You need to file an ICO complaint

The ICO (Information Commissioner’s Office) is the UK’s data protection regulator and has the power to compel both publishers and Google to comply with right to be forgotten requests. An ICO complaint made by a regulated law firm, setting out properly constructed legal arguments, carries considerably more weight than one submitted by an individual. We have won ICO cases against Google and against UK national newspapers. The outcome of those cases – including the acceptance of “most if not all of the very cogent arguments we put forward” – demonstrates what specialist legal representation achieves.

The content involves sensitive personal data

Health information, racial or ethnic origin, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, financial difficulties – these are “special category” data under UK GDPR and attract a higher level of legal protection. The bar for a publisher or Google to justify retaining special category data in search results is significantly higher than for ordinary personal information. Cases involving sensitive data often have strong legal foundations.

You are a high-profile or well-known individual

Business owners, executives, medical professionals, lawyers, politicians, and others in public or professional life often face more complex RTBF arguments because Google and publishers will cite public interest more readily. These cases require a more sophisticated legal approach. We have handled right to be forgotten cases for clients across all these categories and understand the arguments that hold weight with the ICO and the courts.

A content removal company has already failed

You have tried a data removal or reputation management company and the content is still there. Content removal companies are limited in what they can do – they cannot advise on law, they cannot threaten litigation, and they have no standing to argue before the ICO. As solicitors, we can. When a company has reached the limits of what it can achieve, that is often when we begin to make progress.

You are based outside the UK

UK GDPR and the right to be forgotten apply to UK-based Google search results regardless of where the individual lives. We regularly act for clients in the United States, Canada, Australia, and across the EU who need content removed from Google.co.uk and other UK-facing search results. Your location does not limit your rights under UK GDPR.

We have legal leverage that content removal companies lack

As qualified solicitors, we can do things a content removal company cannot. We send letters before action that carry genuine legal weight. We can issue court proceedings. We can make ICO complaints that are taken seriously precisely because they come from a regulated law firm. That leverage fundamentally changes the dynamic of every interaction with Google and publishers.

We know the case law inside out

The right to be forgotten is a fast-evolving area of law. From Google Spain v AEPD (2014) to the post-Brexit UK GDPR position, through the NT1 and NT2 cases in the High Court and the ongoing ICO guidance, the legal framework shifts constantly. We follow every development and apply it directly to your case. That legal precision is what turns a standard request into a removal.

We know the people on the other side

25 years of specialist work means we know many of the people at Google’s legal team and the in-house solicitors at the major national titles. A well-pitched letter from a firm they know and respect often achieves in two weeks what a cold approach cannot achieve in two years.

We do not stop at the first refusal

Google refuses many initial requests. Publishers resist. The ICO can take time. We treat a first refusal as the start of the process, not the end. We examine exactly why the refusal was made, which legal arguments were not accepted, whether the ICO is the right next step, and which alternative routes are available. Persistence, backed by legal knowledge, is how we achieve results that others have been told are impossible.

Legal professional privilege from day one

Everything you share with us is protected by legal professional privilege from your very first contact. It cannot be disclosed. It cannot be used against you. If your case involves sensitive personal or professional matters – as RTBF cases often do – that protection matters enormously. A content removal company cannot offer it. We can.

We are honest about what we can and cannot do

Not every right to be forgotten case is winnable. We will tell you so at the outset rather than take your money and string the case along. If the legal arguments are not strong enough, we say so clearly at the assessment stage. If they are, we pursue them with everything we have. That honesty is what our clients trust us for – and why so many come back when they need help again.

★★★★★

“I am absolutely delighted about the outcome of my right to be forgotten application. This exercise requires considerable expertise and I am totally pleased with the outcome.”

Right to be forgotten client

★★★★★

“Your assistance and guidance is far beyond the value of any fees paid.”

Chris – 1,017 pages removed from Google

★★★★★

“Giving my family, in particular my sons, a more stress free normal life… you have given us our lives back.”

Eric – 3 pages removed

★★★★★

The ICO accepted “most if not all of the very cogent arguments” we put forward.

Diego – 28 pages removed, ICO case won

★★★★★

“Excellent solicitors, very professional and delivered wonderful results.”

Martin – 13 pages removed

★★★★★

“Excellent, professional service delivered within a tight timeline. Have used twice and will use again.”

Thomas – 4 pages, repeat client

★★★★★

“I hope never to need their services again but I would recommend them without hesitation.”

Edwin – New York, 2 pages

★★★★★

“I have found your fantastic team of internet lawyers incredibly helpful, robust and hugely knowledgeable. You are certainly a safe pair of hands to be in during difficult times.”

David Baum

★★★★★

“Refreshingly – for a lawyer – Yair Cohen advised me not to hire him in this instance as it would not be a good investment of time and money.”

Honest advice – we tell you if we cannot help

★★★★★

“Your team and professional services are excellent and I actually really enjoyed my conversation with the solicitor.”

Mrs S.L

★★★★★

“The result has been fantastic and the best I could have hoped for. I was very distressed by the situation I found myself in and Cohen Davis were brilliant.”

Dr B.Y – Bradford

★★★★★

“I have been very pleased with the services provided by Cohen Davis. Their team have acted very professionally and the outcome has been very satisfactory.”

Mr E.P – Jersey, Channel Islands

★★★★★

“From start to finish very refreshing. Friendly, efficient, professional and very informative.”

Verified client

★★★★★

“Sara, Richard, Paul and Eva were a fantastic team. Knowledgeable, responsive and extremely helpful throughout.”

International client – New York

★★★★★

“1000 thank yous for removing the pages. It took a while but we finally got it off…”

HZ – 579 pages removed, California

Free 15-minute Expert Assessment

A qualified internet law solicitor reviews your URLs and situation, applies the legal tests under UK GDPR and current case law, and tells you honestly whether strong arguments exist for removal and what the recommended route is.

Written Case Review and Fixed-Fee Quote

Within 48 hours, you receive a written review of your case, the recommended legal strategy, and a fixed-fee quote. Valid for 14 days. You decide whether to proceed. Nothing starts until you agree in writing.

We act – and we persist

If you instruct us, we begin work immediately. Named solicitor. Clear communication. Legal escalation wherever required. We do not stop at the first Google refusal.

Fixed fee, quoted in writing before any work starts.

Multiple publications, ICO proceedings, or court action – fully scoped and quoted in advance.

A spent conviction still appears when employers Google you

You are applying for jobs, contracts, or professional positions. The employer, recruiter, or client Googles your name and finds the conviction article immediately. Your conviction is spent under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act. You are under no obligation to disclose it. But Google has not moved on. The fact that a spent conviction appears prominently in Google results is precisely the harm that the right to be forgotten – combined with the ROA 1974 – was designed to remedy. These cases have strong legal foundations, and we handle them regularly.

You were found not guilty but the arrest or charge article still ranks

You were charged with an offence and acquitted at trial. Or the charges were dropped before trial reached. Either way, you were found or declared not guilty. Yet a Google search still surfaces the article reporting the original charge, arrest, or allegation – with little or no mention of the outcome. This is one of the clearest cases for removal under UK GDPR. The continued indexing of a charge article after an acquittal misrepresents the facts and causes ongoing and disproportionate harm.

The proceedings were discontinued but an article about them remains

A criminal prosecution was abandoned before trial – the CPS discontinued, the charges were withdrawn, or the matter never proceeded to court. But an article about the charges or investigation continues to rank in Google results under your name. You were never convicted. The matter never went to trial. Yet the digital record of the allegations persists. This is a strong case for delisting under the right to be forgotten, and we have resolved many cases in exactly this situation.

A foreign conviction appears in UK Google results

A conviction recorded in another country – in the United States, Europe, Australia, or elsewhere – appears in UK Google results under your name. You may have served the sentence abroad, the conviction may be spent or pardoned under the laws of the relevant country, or it may relate to conduct that would not constitute a criminal offence in the UK. UK GDPR applies to what appears in UK-facing search results regardless of where the underlying event took place. We handle foreign conviction removal cases regularly.

A caution from years ago is indexed via an online court record site

A simple caution accepted years ago, perhaps for a minor matter, has been picked up by a court record aggregator site or a data broker and is now indexing prominently in Google results. The caution itself may be spent, the conduct may have been trivial, and the continued Google presence of the information may be entirely disproportionate to any legitimate public interest. We address both the aggregator sites directly and Google delisting via UK GDPR in these cases.

A news article from a case where charges were later dropped

A newspaper reported on your arrest, charge, or investigation. The case was subsequently dropped – the CPS decided not to proceed, the complainant withdrew, or the evidence did not support prosecution. The newspaper article remains, however – in many cases still appearing near the top of Google results under your name, years after the matter was closed without a conviction. We pursue removal and delisting in these cases as a matter of course, with a strong track record of success.

A conviction record from when you were a minor

A criminal conviction or youth caution from when you were a minor continues to appear in Google results years or decades later. The youth justice system is specifically designed to allow young people to move on from their past. A conviction that was spent almost immediately under the ROA, and that relates to conduct from childhood or adolescence, carries particularly strong arguments for removal from Google. We handle youth record removal cases and are experienced in the specific legal arguments these cases require.

Professional discipline records (MPTS/SDT) still appearing in Google

A Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service decision, a Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal ruling, or another professional regulatory outcome continues to appear in Google results long after the sanction has been served and your career has resumed. These records sit alongside criminal conviction content in many clients’ Google results. We handle professional discipline removal cases for doctors, solicitors, accountants, teachers, nurses, and financial professionals, and understand the specific arguments these regulatory bodies and Google will engage with.

We use the ROA 1974 and UK GDPR together

Most firms apply UK GDPR alone. We apply the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 alongside UK GDPR to build a dual-track legal argument that is harder for Google and publishers to dismiss. The ROA establishes the principle that a spent conviction should not follow a person indefinitely. UK GDPR provides the mechanism to enforce that principle against search engines and online publishers. Together, they make a compelling case – and we know how to construct and present it effectively.

We have won ICO cases involving criminal conviction content

The ICO has the power to compel Google and publishers to remove or delist conviction-related content. We have won ICO cases in this area, including cases where Google had already refused an individual’s RTBF request. The ICO accepted “most if not all of the very cogent arguments we put forward” in one such case, resulting in the removal of 28 pages (client: Diego). An ICO complaint made by a regulated law firm, properly constructed, carries far more weight than one filed by an individual.

We address aggregator sites and court record databases

Many of our clients in this area are affected not just by news articles but by court record aggregator sites and data broker platforms that index conviction data. We know which sites are responsive to which arguments and legal routes, and we pursue both direct removal from these sites and Google delisting simultaneously. Addressing the aggregator at source is often the fastest path to a clean Google result.

We treat a Google refusal as the start, not the end

Google frequently refuses RTBF requests for criminal conviction content, citing public interest in criminal proceedings. We treat that refusal as information – about which argument Google found insufficient and which alternative routes are most likely to succeed. We reframe, we escalate, and we persist. Some of our most significant conviction removal results came after multiple earlier refusals, through sustained legal pressure applied via the ICO, the courts, and direct to Google’s legal team.

Can a spent conviction be removed from Google?

Yes, in many cases. Once a conviction is spent under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974, the legal arguments for removing it from Google become significantly stronger. The ROA establishes the principle that a spent conviction should not continue to affect a person’s life indefinitely. UK GDPR provides the mechanism to enforce that principle against search engines and publishers. Together, these two legal instruments form the basis for many of our most successful conviction removal cases. The specific outcome depends on the offence type, the sentence, the age of the conviction, and the nature of the content – which is exactly what the free Expert Assessment examines.

What is the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act and how does it help?

The Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 provides that, after a specified rehabilitation period (which varies by sentence length), most criminal convictions become “spent.” Once spent, the convicted person is treated in law as if the conviction never happened in most contexts – they do not need to disclose it to employers, for instance. The relevance to Google is that a spent conviction appearing prominently in Google results defeats the entire purpose of the ROA. We use the ROA alongside UK GDPR Article 17 to make the case for removal – and the combination is a powerful one.

Can I remove an article from when I was found not guilty?

Yes, and this is one of the strongest categories for removal. An article reporting charges or a trial where you were acquitted – particularly one that gives far more prominence to the allegation than to the verdict – presents one of the clearest cases for delisting under UK GDPR. The fact that you were found not guilty makes continued prominent indexing of the charge article inaccurate in its overall impression and disproportionate in its impact. We have resolved many cases of this type successfully.

Does a caution count as a conviction for RTBF purposes?

A caution is not a criminal conviction – but that does not mean it falls outside the right to be forgotten. A caution accepted many years ago that continues to index in Google through court record sites, data broker listings, or news articles is personal data whose continued processing can be challenged under UK GDPR. In many cases the age of the caution and the proportionality test strongly favour removal. We handle caution removal cases and can advise you on the specific arguments available at the free Expert Assessment.

Can I remove a foreign conviction from UK Google results?

Yes. UK GDPR applies to what appears in UK-facing Google search results regardless of where the underlying conviction occurred or where the content is hosted. A conviction in the United States, Australia, Europe, or elsewhere that appears in UK Google results can be challenged under UK GDPR. We also consider whether the conviction is spent or pardoned under the laws of the relevant country, whether it relates to conduct not constituting an offence in the UK, and whether the continued indexing is proportionate. Foreign conviction removal is a regular part of our work.

What if the conviction was for a serious offence?

We do not decline cases on the basis of the nature of the offence. The legal test under UK GDPR is whether the continued processing of the personal data is proportionate and justified in the current context. That test applies regardless of how serious the original offence was. Relevant factors include the age of the conviction, the sentence served, the extent of rehabilitation, and the degree of ongoing public interest. We have handled cases across a wide range of offence types. The Expert Assessment gives you an honest view of the prospects without judgement.

Can Google remove links to court records and conviction databases?

Yes. Google can delist links to court records and conviction database entries from its search results under UK GDPR, even where the underlying record remains publicly accessible elsewhere. We also pursue direct removal from the third-party sites hosting conviction data where that is achievable. Whether Google will delist depends on the specific nature of the content, the public interest arguments, and how the case is constructed – which is exactly what we assess in the free Expert Assessment.

Does a conviction need to be spent before it can be removed from Google?

No. While a spent conviction significantly strengthens the legal arguments, UK GDPR’s proportionality test does not require a conviction to be spent before it can be the subject of a removal request. Other factors – including the age of the article, the extent of your rehabilitation, the triviality of the original matter, and the degree of current public interest – can all support a removal argument even for an unspent conviction. The Expert Assessment examines all of these factors for your specific case.

What happens in the free Expert Assessment?

A qualified internet law solicitor calls you. You share the URLs of the conviction-related content you want removed and explain the background to your case. The solicitor assesses the legal basis for removal under the ROA 1974 and UK GDPR, identifies the most effective route (Google RTBF, ICO complaint, publisher direct, court action), and gives you an honest view of the prospects. The call takes approximately 15 minutes and is completely free. Within 48 hours you receive a written case review and a fixed-fee quote. No obligation, no pressure.

How much does it cost to remove a conviction from Google?

Standard cases start from £1,000 + VAT, with a fixed fee quoted in writing before any work begins. Complex cases – multiple articles, resistant publishers, ICO escalation, court proceedings, or cross-border content – start from £5,000 + VAT. The Expert Assessment itself is completely free.

What if you tell me you cannot help?

We tell you honestly. One of our clients noted: “Refreshingly – for a lawyer – Yair Cohen advised me not to hire him in this instance as it would not be a good investment.” If the conviction content cannot be removed or the prospects are too uncertain to justify the cost, we say so at the assessment stage. We would rather give you an honest answer than take your money on a case we do not believe in.

★★★★★

“Your assistance and guidance is far beyond the value of any fees paid.”

Chris – 1,017 pages removed from Google

★★★★★

“1000 thank yous for removing the pages. It took a while but we finally got it off…”

HZ – 579 pages removed, California

★★★★★

The ICO accepted “most if not all of the very cogent arguments” we put forward.

Diego – 28 pages removed, ICO case won

★★★★★

“Giving my family, in particular my sons, a more stress free normal life… you have given us our lives back.”

Eric – 3 pages removed

★★★★★

“Excellent solicitors, very professional and delivered wonderful results.”

Martin – 13 pages removed

★★★★★

“Excellent, professional service delivered within a tight timeline. Have used twice and will use again.”

Thomas – 4 pages, repeat client

★★★★★

“I hope never to need their services again but I would recommend them without hesitation.”

Edwin – New York, 2 pages

★★★★★

“Cohen Davis were exceptionally professional and swift with my case. It was reassuring that they have the experience and knowledge to help me, especially when I live in New York.”

Ms J.J – New York, United States

★★★★★

“My future happiness depended on the work of this company and they more than delivered. I quite simply cannot recommend enough.”

Mr B.G – Nottingham

★★★★★

“I have found your fantastic team of internet lawyers incredibly helpful, robust and hugely knowledgeable. You are certainly a safe pair of hands to be in during difficult times.”

David Baum

★★★★★

“Your team and professional services are excellent and I actually really enjoyed my conversation with the solicitor.”

Mrs S.L

★★★★★

“I am absolutely delighted about the outcome of my right to be forgotten application. This exercise requires considerable expertise and I am totally pleased with the outcome.”

Right to be forgotten client

★★★★★

“The result has been fantastic and the best I could have hoped for. I was very distressed by the situation I found myself in and Cohen Davis were brilliant.”

Dr B.Y – Bradford

★★★★★

“I have been very pleased with the services provided by Cohen Davis. Their team have acted very professionally and the outcome has been very satisfactory.”

Mr E.P – Jersey, Channel Islands

★★★★★

“Thank you Yair for an excellent service. Your attention to detail and approachable staff are an asset to the firm.”

Elliot Crego

Free 15-minute Expert Assessment

A qualified internet law solicitor reviews the conviction content you want removed, applies the ROA 1974 and UK GDPR legal tests, and tells you honestly what can be removed from Google and which route is most likely to succeed for your specific case.

Written Case Review and Fixed-Fee Quote

Within 48 hours, you receive a written review of your case and a fixed-fee quote. Valid for 14 days. You decide whether to proceed. Nothing starts until you agree in writing.

We act – and we persist

If you instruct us, we begin work immediately. Named solicitor. Clear communication. Google RTBF, ICO escalation, direct publisher contact, court proceedings – whatever your case requires, we pursue it without stopping at the first refusal.

An old court report still ranks on page one

A court report from a criminal, civil, or tribunal hearing continues to appear prominently in Google results years after the matter concluded. Perhaps you were convicted but have since served your sentence and rebuilt your life. Perhaps charges were dropped or you were found not guilty and the report never captured that outcome. Court reporting is one of our strongest areas – we know which arguments succeed and which routes to pursue first.

A national newspaper article about a dispute you settled years ago

A national title covered a business dispute, a civil claim, or a personal matter at the time. The matter has long since been resolved – but the article lives on in Google and continues to colour how potential clients, employers, or partners see you. We have successfully approached national newspaper legal teams on exactly this basis. The passage of time and the resolution of the underlying dispute are both relevant to the legal arguments for removal.

A local paper article that follows you to a new area

A local newspaper article that was once read only by people in your neighbourhood now travels with you wherever you go. When you move to a new area, join a new community, or start a new job, a Google search still surfaces the old story. Local articles – particularly from Reach and Newsquest titles – are among the cases we handle most frequently, with a strong track record of securing delistings and source removals.

A BBC or ITV article about an incident that is no longer relevant

Broadcast content from the BBC, ITV, Sky News, or Channel 4 that is indexed online continues to appear in Google results long after it has ceased to be of any public interest. Broadcasters resist removal requests as a matter of course, citing editorial independence. As solicitors, we can apply legal pressure that a content removal company or an individual simply cannot. We have successfully pursued BBC and broadcaster content removal on multiple occasions.

A news article about someone else that names you

The article was not about you – it was about a business, an organisation, a public figure, or an event. But your name appears in it, and now it ranks prominently when someone searches for you. You had little or no say in the original coverage. Where the naming is incidental to the main story and continued indexing under your name serves no legitimate public interest, there are strong legal arguments for delisting the article from results linked to your name.

Press coverage of a criminal case where you were acquitted

The article covered a criminal charge or prosecution. You were found not guilty, or the charges were dropped before trial – but that outcome was never covered, or was covered far less prominently than the original allegation. The continued prominence of the charge article in Google results despite your acquittal is exactly the kind of disproportionate and misleading processing the right to be forgotten was designed to address. These cases frequently succeed.

Trade press or professional journal content from a past dispute

An article in a trade publication, professional journal, or sector-specific outlet covered a dispute, a disciplinary matter, or a regulatory case involving you. The audience for this content is precisely the professional community you work in. The article may be years old and the matter long resolved – but it continues to appear when colleagues, clients, or regulators search your name online. We handle trade press removal regularly.

An article from overseas news sites appearing in UK Google

The content is on a US news site, an Australian publication, an EU outlet, or another international source – but it appears prominently in UK Google results. Cross-border cases are a regular part of our work. UK GDPR applies to what appears in UK-facing search results regardless of where the content is hosted, and we also pursue direct removal from international publishers where that is the more effective route.

We know the publishers’ legal teams

We know the in-house solicitors and editorial legal teams at the major national titles. When a letter from Cohen Davis arrives, it is read by someone who knows our track record – and who knows that we will escalate if we need to. A cold take-down request from an unknown firm or an individual will almost always be refused on public interest grounds. A targeted, legally precise letter from a firm with a 25-year relationship with these publishers operates in a different register entirely.

We understand the public interest test in depth

The public interest argument is the main defence publishers use to resist removal requests. We understand it in depth – both from the UK GDPR case law and from years of arguing these cases before the ICO and the courts. We know when the public interest argument holds weight and when it does not, and we construct our submissions accordingly. Many articles that look like they cannot be removed can be, once the right argument is properly framed.

We have won ICO cases involving news articles

The ICO has the power to compel publishers and Google to remove or delist content. We have won ICO cases involving news articles, including cases where Google had already refused. The ICO accepted “most if not all of the very cogent arguments we put forward” in one such case (client: Diego, 28 pages removed). The ICO is a route that many firms do not pursue effectively – because they have not done it often enough to know how.

We pursue delisting and source removal simultaneously

Most content removal companies focus on one route. We pursue both in parallel where appropriate: source removal from the publisher’s website, and Google delisting under UK GDPR. Even where source removal is refused, Google delisting removes the article from search results. Even where delisting takes time, source removal can break the indexing chain. Two simultaneous routes to the same outcome is better than one.

Can you remove a news article from Google?

Yes, in many cases. News articles can be delisted from Google’s search results under the right to be forgotten provisions of UK GDPR, and in some cases the original content can also be removed from the publisher’s website. The strength of the argument depends on the age of the article, the nature of its content, the publication involved, and whether continued indexing of the article under your name serves a legitimate and proportionate public interest. Our free Expert Assessment will tell you honestly whether your specific articles can be removed and by which route.

Do newspapers have to agree to remove articles?

No. We can pursue removal of a news article from Google search results independently of whether the newspaper agrees to remove it from its own website. Google can delist the article under UK GDPR even if the publisher refuses to take it down. We can also apply to the ICO, which has the power to compel compliance. And where the content is defamatory or otherwise unlawful, court proceedings against the publisher remain an option. The newspaper’s refusal is rarely the end of the road.

What if the article is factually correct but outdated?

This is one of the most important points about the right to be forgotten: the article does not need to be inaccurate to be removed. Under UK GDPR, the question is whether its continued processing – its continued appearance in search results – is proportionate and justified in the current context. An article that was accurate and relevant when published ten years ago may no longer be relevant now, and its continued prominence may cause disproportionate harm. Many of our most successful cases involve factually accurate but outdated articles.

Can you remove a BBC or national newspaper article?

Yes. We have successfully pursued removal and delisting involving the BBC, ITV, Sky News, The Sun, the Daily Mail, The Mirror, The Times, The Telegraph, The Guardian, The Express, The Independent, the Evening Standard, and many more. National titles and broadcasters have strong legal teams and will resist requests that do not carry legal weight. That is exactly why having specialist solicitors with direct relationships with those teams – and the ability to escalate – makes such a difference.

What if the article was about someone else and just named me?

If you are named incidentally in an article that is primarily about someone or something else, there are still grounds for removal – particularly if continued indexing of the article under your name serves no legitimate public interest. The legal test is not whether the article was about you, but whether its current prominence in results linked to your name is justified. We handle these cases regularly and can assess the strength of the argument at the free Expert Assessment.

The article is about a criminal case – can it still be removed?

Yes, in many cases. Where the conviction is spent under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act, where the case resulted in an acquittal, where charges were discontinued, or where the article presents only part of the story (the charge but not the acquittal, for example), the legal arguments for removal are often strong. Criminal case articles are one of the most significant categories we handle – and one of the most important, given the impact on employment and personal life.

Can old online-only articles be delisted?

Yes. Articles on digital-native publications, news aggregators, and archived online-only sites are subject to the same UK GDPR framework as articles from established print titles. In some cases online-only publications are more receptive to take-down requests than national titles – and in other cases they are more resistant. We assess each case individually and pursue the most effective route for your specific article and publication.

Is delisting the same as deletion?

No. Delisting removes the article from appearing in Google search results – the article itself remains on the publisher’s website but can no longer be found via Google. Deletion removes the article from the publisher’s website entirely. Where possible, we pursue both in parallel: delisting from Google under UK GDPR, and source removal from the publisher where achievable. For most clients, delisting from Google delivers the practical outcome they need – the article is no longer findable by the people searching their name.

What happens in the free Expert Assessment?

A qualified internet law solicitor calls you. You share the URLs of the news articles you want removed and explain the background. The solicitor assesses the legal basis for removal, identifies the strongest route (Google RTBF, ICO, publisher direct, court), and gives you an honest view of the likely outcome. The call takes approximately 15 minutes. Within 48 hours you receive a written case review and a fixed-fee quote. No obligation. No pressure.

How much does it cost to remove a news article from Google?

Standard cases start from £1,000 + VAT, with a fixed fee quoted in writing before any work begins. Complex cases – multiple articles, resistant national publishers, ICO escalation, or court proceedings – start from £5,000 + VAT. The Expert Assessment itself is completely free.

What if you tell me you cannot help?

We tell you honestly. One of our clients noted: “Refreshingly – for a lawyer – Yair Cohen advised me not to hire him in this instance as it would not be a good investment.” If the article cannot be removed or the prospects are too uncertain to justify the cost, we say so at the assessment stage. That is the kind of firm we are.

★★★★★

“Your assistance and guidance is far beyond the value of any fees paid.”

Chris – 1,017 pages removed from Google

★★★★★

“1000 thank yous for removing the pages. It took a while but we finally got it off…”

HZ – 579 pages removed, California

★★★★★

The ICO accepted “most if not all of the very cogent arguments” we put forward.

Diego – 28 pages removed, ICO case won

★★★★★

“Giving my family, in particular my sons, a more stress free normal life… you have given us our lives back.”

Eric – 3 pages removed

★★★★★

“Excellent solicitors, very professional and delivered wonderful results.”

Martin – 13 pages removed

★★★★★

“Excellent, professional service delivered within a tight timeline. Have used twice and will use again.”

Thomas – 4 pages, repeat client

★★★★★

“I hope never to need their services again but I would recommend them without hesitation.”

Edwin – New York, 2 pages

★★★★★

“Cohen Davis were exceptionally professional and swift with my case. It was reassuring that they have the experience and knowledge to help me, especially when I live in New York.”

Ms J.J – New York, United States

★★★★★

“My future happiness depended on the work of this company and they more than delivered. I quite simply cannot recommend enough.”

Mr B.G – Nottingham

★★★★★

“I have found your fantastic team of internet lawyers incredibly helpful, robust and hugely knowledgeable. You are certainly a safe pair of hands to be in during difficult times.”

David Baum

★★★★★

“Your team and professional services are excellent and I actually really enjoyed my conversation with the solicitor.”

Mrs S.L

★★★★★

“I am absolutely delighted about the outcome of my right to be forgotten application. This exercise requires considerable expertise and I am totally pleased with the outcome.”

Right to be forgotten client

★★★★★

“The result has been fantastic and the best I could have hoped for. I was very distressed by the situation I found myself in and Cohen Davis were brilliant.”

Dr B.Y – Bradford

★★★★★

“I have been very pleased with the services provided by Cohen Davis. Their team have acted very professionally and the outcome has been very satisfactory.”

Mr E.P – Jersey, Channel Islands

★★★★★

“Thank you Yair for an excellent service. Your attention to detail and approachable staff are an asset to the firm.”

Elliot Crego

Free 15-minute Expert Assessment

A qualified internet law solicitor reviews the news articles you want removed, applies the UK GDPR legal tests and current case law, and tells you honestly what can be removed from Google and by which route.

Written Case Review and Fixed-Fee Quote

Within 48 hours, you receive a written review of your case and a fixed-fee quote. Valid for 14 days. You decide whether to proceed. Nothing starts until you agree in writing.

We act – and we persist

If you instruct us, we begin work immediately. Named solicitor. Clear communication. Publisher contact, Google RTBF submission, ICO escalation, court proceedings – whatever your case requires, we pursue it.