A review request email is still a commercial email, and the rules that govern commercial email do not pause because your intentions are wholesome. The good news: compliance for review requests is genuinely simple once you know which regime you are in, and the compliant version is also the version that gets better response rates. Here is what belongs at the bottom of every review request sent to UK and EU customers, and why.
The usual honest caveat: this is practical guidance from operators, not legal advice for your specific situation.
The two questions that decide everything
1. Is a review request marketing, or service?
The regulatory line between a transactional message (order confirmations, shipping updates) and direct marketing matters because marketing rules are stricter. Review requests sit in a grey zone regulators have repeatedly leaned on: a message soliciting engagement for the brand's benefit is generally treated as marketing in the UK and most EU states. Build to the marketing standard and the grey zone cannot hurt you.
2. What legal basis are you sending on?
For existing customers, both the UK (PECR) and EU states operating the same framework offer the soft opt-in: you may email marketing to someone whose details you collected during a sale of your own similar products, provided they were told at collection and could refuse, and provided every message since offers a simple way out. Your review request to a recent buyer fits this neatly, if the footer does its job.
The compliant footer, piece by piece
- Who is sending. The legal identity behind the email: trading name and registered company name if different, plus a postal address. A bare first name in the signature is good copy, as we argued in the templates guide, but the footer carries the formal identity.
- A working unsubscribe. One click or one reply, processed promptly, applying to future review requests and marketing alike. "Reply STOP to never hear from us again" satisfies both the law and the reader. Silent suppression lists must actually work: the fastest way to turn a mild annoyance into a complaint to the ICO or CNIL is emailing someone who already opted out.
- Why they are receiving this. One line: "You are receiving this because you recently ordered from [brand]." It is not strictly mandated everywhere, but it pre-answers the reader's first suspicious question and materially reduces spam reports, which matter more to your deliverability than any regulator.
- Nothing that smells like payment. Not a footer element but a content rule that belongs in the same checklist: no incentives, no prize draws for reviewers, no "5 stars would help". That is platform policy everywhere and, in the UK, banned-practices territory under the DMCC Act, as covered in our gating guide.
France and the EU: the local flavour
The same architecture applies across the Channel with local labels: the French regime (CNIL's reading of the ePrivacy rules) accepts the customer exemption for similar products and services, expects information at collection, and expects opposition to be as easy as a click. German practice is famously strict about the similar-products boundary; if you sell into DACH, keep review requests tied tightly to the actual purchase. Across the EU, the safe design is identical: existing customer, similar product, told at collection, out in one click.
The part that protects deliverability, not just compliance
Regulators fine the negligent occasionally; inbox providers punish the sloppy daily. The same footer elements that satisfy PECR also keep you out of spam folders: a real sender identity, a working unsubscribe (now mechanically enforced by Gmail and Yahoo through one-click unsubscribe requirements for bulk senders), and low complaint rates. A review request that looks like a personal note but unsubscribes like a professional operation is the combination that survives both audits.
Review requests are one of five or six post-purchase messages whose timing, content and legal posture have to work together, which is exactly the kind of system that benefits from being designed once, properly. If you want your whole post-purchase flow scored, footer included, the free audit covers it.
FAQ
Do I need explicit consent before sending a review request?
For your own recent customers, generally no: the soft opt-in covers it in the UK and comparable EU regimes, provided the collection-time notice and every-message opt-out are in place.
Does one unsubscribe stop review requests or all marketing?
Treat it as all marketing unless the subscriber explicitly chose granular preferences. Guessing that someone who opted out of newsletters still wants review requests is how complaints are born.
Can I send review requests to guests who never made an account?
Purchase, not account, is what matters. A guest checkout customer is still your customer; the same soft opt-in logic and footer rules apply.
What about SMS review requests?
Same framework, tighter tolerance: identify yourself, honour STOP instantly, and respect that a text interrupts more than an email. Many stores reserve SMS for delivery updates and keep review requests in email.