The public register
Who is invited to review, and on what basis
This page describes the invitations Primer sends on behalf of the salons that use it. Which basis applies to one salon is published in that salon's own register.
This page says who receives an invitation to review a visit, why we are allowed to send it, and how to stop it in one step. The rules are the same for every salon on Primer. Only the legal basis differs from country to country, and this page names the one in force here.
Who receives the invitation
Every customer who completes an appointment is invited to review it, once for that visit — neither the salon nor Primer chooses who is asked, because any selection would distort the register. Who that reaches depends on the country: where the national transposition of the existing-customer exception has been read and cleared, it is everyone whose contact details were collected through a booking door that showed them this notice; everywhere else, and wherever a salon's country cannot be established, it is the narrower group of customers who agreed to receive messages from the salon. Which of the two applies to one salon is published in that salon's own register, and no salon can choose either way. A visit counts as finished when it was closed at the till, with the finish button, or automatically at least 2 hours after its end time, and was not cancelled.
The legal basis in force here
Two grounds, because the law has two. Where the invitation rests on legitimate interest it is art. 6(1)(f) GDPR together with the existing-customer exception for electronic messages (art. 13(2) of Directive 2002/58, as transposed nationally — in Romania, art. 12(2) of Law 506/2004). Everywhere else it rests on consent, art. 6(1)(a) GDPR. The right to object under art. 21 GDPR is carried in the first message either way. The basis is decided by Primer, per country, and is identical for every salon in that country. A salon cannot choose it, widen it or narrow it — that is what makes this published policy checkable.
Every check an invitation has to pass
These are the gates, in the order the code that sends the invitation evaluates them. The first one that refuses is the reason recorded against that visit. The last column is the honest half: it says which gates the salon can move, and in which direction — a gate a salon can only ever CLOSE cannot be used to nominate somebody for an invitation.
| What is checked | Who it excludes | Can the salon move it? |
|---|---|---|
| The visit is finished, not deleted, and was not cancelled — closed at the till, closed with the finish button, or closed automatically at least 2 hours after its end time. | Visits that were cancelled or recorded as an absence; and finished visits the salon deleted afterwards. | Only to remove, and it is counted. The salon has 2 hours from the end time to cancel a visit that did not happen or to record it as an absence; after that the visit closes by itself and is asked about. The clock runs day and night: for a visit that ends after closing time those 2 hours fall outside opening hours, so the salon’s answer comes afterwards — it records the absence, the invitation stops working, and the correction is counted on the salon’s own register screen, whether or not an invitation had already gone out. At this check, a visit that did happen can only be kept out of the invitation by recording something untrue — a cancellation, an absence, or a deletion after it finished; the truthful levers the salon does have are the checks further down this table, and each one says there what it can do. Every untrue record leaves a mark: deletions after finishing and absences recorded after the visit had closed are shown as numbers on the salon’s own register screen, and a salon whose cancellations are abnormally rare raises a public signal on its own reviews page. |
| The salon is collecting reviews at all. | Everybody, for as long as collection is paused. | Yes — and pausing is a public event, recorded permanently in the register, which nobody can remove afterwards. |
| No invitation has already gone out for this visit. | Visits that were already invited on. | No. |
| There is no review for this visit yet. | Visits that have already been reviewed. | No. |
| There is a phone number to send the invitation to. | Customers with no number on their record. | No. |
| The person has not objected — by replying STOP, by using the one-click link carried in the message, by saying so at the counter and having the salon relay it, or by having their published review taken down at their own request or under the right to erasure. | Everyone who has objected. Permanently, and without any balancing test. | Only to remove. A salon can relay an objection somebody states at its counter; it can never withdraw one. |
| The person is not on the salon's own block list. | Blocked customers. | Only to remove. A block takes somebody out and can never put somebody in, and every block is counted on the salon's own register screen. |
| Legitimate interest: The contact details were left at a booking door that showed this notice, or the person authorised messaging themselves. | Everyone whose details were collected before that notice existed — neither invited nor refusing. | No. The only way into this group is showing somebody this notice at a booking door. |
| Consent: The person has agreed to receive messages from the salon. | Everyone who has not agreed. | Yes, in both directions — this is the one gate that is not one-way. The agreement is a field on the customer record which the salon can switch on or off, and every switch-off is counted on the salon's own register screen. |
| The person does not already have a published review at this salon. | Everyone whose review is still published at this salon, however many times they come back. One person, one review. A review that was later removed no longer closes this door — but if it was taken down at the author's own request or under the right to erasure, the objection check above closes it instead, permanently. | No. The renewal invitation is a platform switch, not a salon setting: today it is off, so a customer whose review is still published here is never asked again. A salon can neither turn it on nor delete the review that closes the door — only the person who wrote it can have it taken down, and taking it down does not put them back in the pool: we record the same objection a STOP records, so no further invitation is sent to them here. |
| Inside the limits: at most one invitation every 30 days per person, and at most 3 unanswered invitations ever. | People invited too recently, and people who have not answered 3 times. | No — these limits are platform-wide and identical for every salon. |
How far this group has got
This figure is published per salon, on that salon's own copy of this page. There is no fleet-wide version of it: one number covering every register would be a fresh claim about the platform's volume, bought to replace the per-salon one this policy has just stopped publishing.
How to verify
You can check this yourself, with no account and no key. The tool reads public documents only: it re-derives the hash chain from the first entry, checks the signature against the key set published beside the register, and holds the head of the chain against the daily anchor. Run:
Paste the address of the salon whose register you want to check. The command below updates as you type.
npx primer-verify <salon-address> --corroborateHow often, and for how long
One invitation per visit at most; at most one invitation every 30 days per person; at most 3 unanswered invitations in total, after which nobody is asked again; and never again after a STOP. These limits are platform-wide and no salon can change them.
What the message contains
A greeting, the fact that your visit is finished, a single link to the review form, and the way to object. No offer, no discount, no coupon, no invitation to book again, no second link — and never the name of the service you had, so the message cannot suggest anything about your health.
What data is used
Only the contact details you already gave for the appointment, and the fact that the visit took place. No profiling, no data added, nothing sold, and nothing passed to a third party for their own purposes.
Who is responsible
The salon is the controller for its relationship with you, and it is the trader whose service the review is about. Primer decides the invitation rule — uniformly, for every salon, which is exactly why a salon cannot select who is asked — and operates the public register; for both of those Primer is a controller in its own right.
What happens to the review
It is published under your visit, in an append-only register: neither the salon nor Primer can edit it or make it quietly disappear. The salon can reply in public. You can correct your own review: a correction publishes a new version without removing the old one. You can also withdraw it, and it can be removed on a legal ground — an erasure request, a takedown or a court order; every removal is written into the register with its ground. If you withdraw it, or have it erased, we also stop asking you for reviews at that salon — your booking confirmations and reminders are unaffected. To withdraw it, or to ask for it to be erased, write to the salon or to Primer at privacy@primer.tech; the answer is due within one month. One more thing about this register and money: it records whether your visit was settled through Primer’s own till, and from this change onward it records only the yes. Where there was no such payment nothing is published — an empty field means undeclared, never unpaid: the salon may have taken the money at its counter, on paper, or on a device this platform never sees, and the register cannot tell those apart. What we stopped doing is stating the no: on every review published from now on, this register does not declare that a visit stayed outside the till, and it does not publish how you paid — for those reviews, cash or card cannot be recovered from this register either, by counting or by any other route. Reviews published before this change keep exactly what they committed to, and still show it: some of them do state the no, and some do name cash or card. A published entry is rebuilt from its own record, and rewriting it would break every proof already anchored — so a register in which older entries name a method and newer ones do not is correct and expected, not a fault. The empty fields can still be counted — under the new rule an absence is simply the missing yes, except on reviews left without a name, where both fields are blank whatever the visit was — and such a count shows one thing only: how many of the visits reviewed here were not settled through Primer’s till. That is not a statement about anybody’s taxes, and it must not be published as one.
Your right to object (art. 21 GDPR)
- Reply STOP to any message, or open the one-click link it carries. One step, free of charge, and it takes effect before the next batch of invitations goes out.
- The objection is honoured without any balancing test and ends the review invitations permanently. It does not cancel your booking confirmations or reminders — those are a different purpose.
- The salon cannot lift your objection. Only you can, and only by asking us. You can also write to the salon or to Primer directly; the answer is due within one month.
Last updated: 2026-08-31