SAB suspended 3x for "deceptive content" — reinstatement denied — licensed CA water damage contractor — need PE eyes

[maccraft]

Hoping a PE can take a look.
Licensed CA contractor, water damage SAB in San Diego. Suspended 3x, last 2 for "deceptive content" with no specifics. Reinstatement appeal with full docs denied.

History: started on PO Box (corrected), 3 failed video verifications under old setup. Profile now clean — no storefront photo, address hidden, name matches license exactly, NAP consistent everywhere.

Feels like algorithmic — early history burned the profile in their risk system.

Questions:
1. Anyone seen "deceptive content" stick to SABs with PO Box history?
2. Keep fighting this profile or start fresh under the Inc?
3. Common SAB triggers I might be missing?

Can share case ID and details via DM. Thanks.

 

[Bartosz_PRD]

I would be careful about starting fresh under the Inc until the old history is mapped clearly. If the PO Box / failed video-verification trail is still attached internally, a new profile with overlapping service area, phone, site, license, or owner data could look like an evasion pattern rather than a clean fix.

For a SAB with repeated deceptive-content denials, I would package the case like this:

1. profile ID and all reinstatement / support case IDs
2. exact suspension reasons and dates, especially the two deceptive-content notices
3. PO Box timeline: when it was used, when it was removed, and what address/service-area settings are active now
4. failed video-verification dates and what was shown in each attempt
5. CA contractor license, business registration, insurance if available, and service-area proof
6. website/NAP consistency screenshots, including footer/contact/service-area pages
7. a short change log showing the current profile no longer uses the old risky setup

The narrow question I would ask support / PE is not simply “please reinstate,” but: is the remaining issue the historic PO Box, failed video verification state, or a current profile/entity mismatch? That gives someone a specific thread to pull instead of treating it like another generic appeal.