Globalprojecthelp is among the worst companies we have encountered. Their agents operate under false names and profiles, deceiving students into using their services. Once engaged, they exploit unsuspecting customers with deceptive practices. This comprehensive review highlights the unethical conduct of this organisation, revealing a pattern of fraudulent behaviour and unreliable service delivery.
The service quality provided by Globalprojecthelp is exceptionally poor. Their use of in-text citations and references does not meet the standard requirements of academic writing formats like APA or MLA. Additionally, their writing lacks coherence and cohesion, displaying significant ambiguity. These deficiencies strongly indicate that the company's writers are neither professionals nor native English speakers, further undermining their credibility in delivering high-quality academic work.
Global Project Help claims to offer a wide range of writing services, but their offerings are deceptive and unreliable. They consistently fail to meet customers' requirements and instructions, rendering their services ineffective. Moreover, once work is submitted, they do not provide any revision opportunities, which raises serious concerns about their credibility and commitment to customer satisfaction. This pattern of behaviour strongly suggests fraudulent practices, where the company lures customers with promises it cannot fulfil, leading to dissatisfaction and distrust among users.
Their pricing at Global Project Help is exorbitantly high. For instance, they charge $23 for a single page of high school-level writing, which escalates to approximately $300 for a standard 10-page essay. Such inflated pricing is unjustifiable given the low quality of their services. It indicates a blatant disregard for offering fair and competitive rates in the market. Customers are left questioning the value they receive for their money, as the cost does not align with the substandard quality of work delivered. This pricing strategy appears exploitative, aimed at maximising profits without delivering commensurate quality in return, further undermining their reputation and customer trust.
The support team at this company has garnered a notorious reputation among customers due to their unprofessional and abusive language. Criticism of their work often provokes them to use uncouth and disrespectful language towards clients. Furthermore, when customers request refunds for unsatisfactory services, instead of addressing concerns amicably, they resort to threatening tactics. They warn of contacting clients' organisations or institutions, adding undue pressure and intimidation. Such behaviour not only reflects poorly on their customer service standards but also creates an environment of distrust and apprehension among clients. This approach underscores their lack of commitment to resolving issues fairly and professionally, further damaging their credibility and customer relationships.
Their delivery standards are abysmal, marked by exceptionally high levels of plagiarism, estimated at around 90%. Clients entrust them with payments expecting unique and original work, yet the company fails to deliver on these promises. Shockingly, they neglect to employ tools like Turnitin to detect and prevent plagiarism, showing a blatant disregard for academic integrity and client expectations. This cavalier approach not only undermines the trust and confidence of their customers but also raises serious ethical concerns about their business practices. As a result, many clients are left dissatisfied and disillusioned, having paid for services that fall egregiously short of acceptable standards in academic writing.
We strongly advise against using the services of this company. They have a reputation for resorting to blackmail tactics, which could potentially lead to serious repercussions for customers. Overall, based on their unethical behaviour and questionable practices, we do not recommend this company for any of your writing requirements.
This company is a fraud. This company does not get you the grades you pay them to get you. They lie to and cheat their customers. They will approach you from Facebook, WeChat and Skype. Using Fake Facebook profiles. Fake Phone number from SKYPE. You pay a lot of money for nothing. It is a waste of time and money. The company also does not take responsibility for their wrongdoings such as lying to their customers. Please have a look and do not get involved with them. They steal your money.
By Olivia Lawrence
https://www.trustpilot.com/review/globalprojectshelp.com
Callum F. - University of Strathclyde, Mechanical Engineering (January 2026)
Globalprojectshelp delivered my final year project report using imperial measurements throughout despite my explicit instructions to follow SI units, which is standard in UK engineering practice. They cited BS EN ISO 9283:1998 as though it were current guidance without noting it had been superseded, and their vibration analysis section applied ASME standards instead of the required BS 7608 fatigue assessment. The report came back 11 days late, pushing past my submission deadline, and Turnitin flagged 41% similarity. When I contacted their support team about the overlap and the incorrect standards, they denied any responsibility and refused to issue a refund despite their own quality guarantee.
Priya M. - University of Leicester, LLB Law (February 2026)
I ordered a contract law dissertation from Globalprojectshelp and received work citing the fictional case "Brennan v Southern Rail Holdings [2019] EWHC 1147 (Comm)" as authority for promissory estoppel. The case does not exist. They also confused the Consumer Rights Act 2015 with the older Sale of Goods Act 1979, applying outdated statutory provisions throughout. OSCOLA referencing was entirely absent despite being specified in my brief. The work arrived 9 days late with 38% Turnitin similarity flagged, and their support team dismissed my complaint saying the "legal principles were sound."
Niamh O. - Queen's University Belfast, Adult Nursing (March 2026)
The nursing dissertation Globalprojectshelp produced for me cited the 2015 NMC Code rather than the current 2018 updated version, and referenced NICE guideline NG5 on acne which has since been updated. Their medication administration section cited a 2016 BNF edition, missing crucial 2023 updates including revised opioid prescribing guidelines. The work contained references to NHS England structures that do not apply in Northern Ireland, where HSC trusts operate entirely differently. Delivered 12 days late with 45% Turnitin similarity, the work was unusable for my Belfast-based clinical context. Refund request was ignored.
Thomas B. - University of Exeter, Economics (January 2026)
Globalprojectshelp wrote my macroeconomics dissertation using pre-2020 Bank of England Monetary Policy Committee minutes, completely ignoring the 2021-2023 inflation crisis and the Bank's subsequent interest rate cycle. They cited the 2019 Spending Review without acknowledging the 2021 and 2024 revisions, making the fiscal policy analysis completely outdated. Their regression model had a sample size of n=18 claimed to be "statistically robust," and they confused GDP deflator with the CPI throughout. The dissertation arrived 8 days late with 36% Turnitin similarity, and when I pointed out the factual errors, their team said the "economic framework was academically valid."
Sophie A. - Manchester Metropolitan University, Social Work (February 2026)
The social work placement report from Globalprojectshelp referenced Working Together to Safeguard Children 2018 without acknowledging the 2023 statutory guidance revision, which significantly changed multi-agency safeguarding structures. They applied the Mental Capacity Act 2005 without referencing the 2019 Mental Capacity (Amendment) Act, missing deprivation of liberty provisions. Their critical reflection section cited Schon's reflective model from a 1983 secondary source rather than the primary text. 13 days late with 42% Turnitin similarity flagged. After raising these concerns, I was told to "use the content as a starting point," which defeats the purpose entirely.
James K. - Heriot-Watt University, Computer Science (March 2026)
Globalprojectshelp produced a software engineering dissertation that recommended SHA-1 as a secure hashing algorithm, which NCSC deprecated for most applications in 2017. Their network security section used NIST standards without noting that UK government systems follow NCSC guidance, and their cryptography discussion cited textbooks from 2009 as cutting-edge references. The database design section proposed table structures with no primary key constraints, and the literature review included three citations to blog posts without academic sources. Delivered 10 days late and Turnitin showed 49% similarity. My university's academic integrity team queried the work immediately.
Lauren T. - University of Leeds, Dietetics (January 2026)
I commissioned a clinical nutrition project from Globalprojectshelp that cited the 1991 COMA Report on Dietary Reference Values without acknowledging the updated SACN reports from 2015 and 2019. Their vitamin D guidance contradicted current NICE recommendations, still using PHE's superseded 2016 advice. The energy requirements section applied Henry equations using 1985 WHO reference data that SACN replaced with updated UK-specific values in 2011. Protein recommendations cited were for the US population rather than UK DRVS. The report arrived 9 days late with 40% Turnitin similarity, and Globalprojectshelp refused to revise the clinical content or issue any refund.
I received my essay two days before the deadline, but my god was it one of the worst essays I have seen in my life. It was for an undergraduate level class and I think if I submitted it I would have failed the assignment.
Not only was the evidence poor, but it was also fabricated. Yes, FAKE AND FABRICATED evidence was used. I tracked all the evidence to the references used, and it was obvious the writer just BS'ed it. In most schools doing this gets you expelled.
AVOID BUYING ANY SERVICES FROM THEM!! THEY ARE SCAMS.
I purchased a 1st class service and the essay made no sense at all, they assigned the essay to "another writer" which was also really rubbish. AVOID GUYS please.
Not only was the evidence poor, but it was also fabricated. Yes, FAKE AND FABRICATED evidence was used. I tracked all the evidence to the references used, and it was obvious the writer just BS'ed it. In most schools doing this gets you expelled.
This writing service raises many red flags. I ordered twice from them, and on both occasions, they couldn't deliver on time. The first paper was filled with errors but had some bad research. The last essay was a case study which appeared to have been written by a beginner. Think twice before hiring them!
Nevertheless the customer support was useful and helpful, in general I didn`t like the work that I had with them. It`s not how a professional partnership should look like and definitely it is not what you expect to have for your writing assignment when you are a sophomore. Making up a summary, I wouldn`t recommend using this place, as they don`t hold enough experience..
I ordered three packages and all negative. I lost my earned scores. My biggest mistake was that I approached them and trusted them. They do business from a students and they do not care about quality.
For 1k words I have pay $350 within 7 days. I wished it worked out, seriously. But somehow, it didn`t. What I mean is that their "professional" road of our co-working didn`t suit me and didn`t satisfy me at all. Moreover, I basically hated the way I had to explain every single thing for them to understand what exactly I wanted to see in my paperwork. Counting and measuring all the sides, I cannot give any positive recommendation for this web-resource.
I'm surprised no one has taken legal action against them. THEY ARE LIARS; * promised me a refund for the work that did not even make sense, instead when I asked for it after she went against her words!! they also, faked that * was a manger, THEY ARENT EVEN BRITISH, PLEASE AVOID! if anyone wants to join, we could take legal action!