Home - Dating Reputation - AWDTSG Removal - Canada - British Columbia
Reviews Removed
Success Rate
Support Available
Confidential
British Columbia is covered by three official AWDTSG groups. Fewer groups than Ontario does not mean less exposure — the Vancouver group covers a metropolitan area of over two and a half million people, and content crosses freely between the three.
We scan all three before submitting anything. Where content has crossed into the Alberta groups, into the Washington State group across the border, or onto platforms outside the AWDTSG network entirely, we identify that during the scan and handle it as one matter rather than discovering it piecemeal later.
Three official AWDTSG groups cover British Columbia:
There is no dedicated group for the Fraser Valley, the Kootenays, Prince George or Northern BC. The network’s guidance is to join the nearest listed group, so posts about residents of Abbotsford, Chilliwack, Nelson or Prince George typically appear in the Vancouver or Okanagan groups rather than anywhere local. People in those communities frequently conclude they are not covered by any group and stop looking, which is how posts sit undiscovered.
As elsewhere, there are also imposter groups using the AWDTSG name without operating under its policies. Establishing which type of group a post sits in changes how a takedown is framed, and is part of our initial scan.
The groups are private and admitted to women only. The person being posted about cannot see the group, cannot search it, and in most cases has no way of confirming a suspicion.
Creating a false profile to get in is not a solution. It breaches the platform’s terms, risks your account, and would undermine any takedown submission you later make. Asking a female friend to check is the usual workaround and it is unreliable — one search in one group misses reposts, and most people guess wrong about which of the three regions their post would have landed in.
If nothing is there, that is the answer, and there is no obligation to go further.
Our AWDTSG checker and search service handles this properly. We scan the BC groupnetwork and report back what exists, where it sits, and how far it has spread. If nothing is there, you get that answer and nothing further happens.
Knowing is not the same as acting. Plenty of clients run a scan, find a single low-visibility post, and decide to leave it. That is a legitimate outcome and we will tell you when we think it is the right one.
A conversation, not a form. Nothing you tell us goes beyond our team, and we do not contact the poster, the group administrators, or anyone in your life at any stage.
A documented record of every instance: post, group, date, visible reach, and the specific content at issue. Where the post uses photographs you took, copyright provides a separate route, covered under image copyright protection.
Submitted through platform reporting channels, framed against the specific policy provisions breached. Precision matters more than volume.
Where a first submission is refused or ignored, we escalate with additional documentation. This is where most self-managed attempts stall.
The full documented record of what was found, submitted and removed. Continued watching beyond that point is available as a separate paid service.
Most cases see an initial platform response within 72 hours of submission. We tell you at intake how we rate your situation rather than promising an outcome the platform controls.
General information, not legal advice. We are not a law firm.
The Intimate Images Protection Act was passed in March 2023 and came into force on 29 January 2024. It gives the Civil Resolution Tribunal jurisdiction over claims about the non-consensual sharing of intimate images, and the tribunal issued its first protection order on 15 February 2024.
What makes it exceptional is the scope of what the tribunal can order. A protection order can require that an intimate image be deleted, de-indexed from search engines, and removed from a website or social media platform. Orders are not limited to the person who posted the content — they can bind platforms and services hosting it. Where a person or platform fails to comply, the tribunal can impose an administrative penalty payable to the provincial government.
Two further features matter. Distribution of an intimate image without consent is an unlawful act that is actionable without proof of damage — you do not have to demonstrate harm. And consent can be revoked: someone who consented to an image being shared previously can withdraw that consent, after which the distributor must make every reasonable effort to remove it.
The tribunal can award damages of up to $5,000. Claims worth more than that are better brought in court, and it is worth taking advice on which forum fits before filing.
The limit is the definition. “Intimate image” is narrow — it does not extend to a dating profile screenshot with written allegations attached. Where your post does include an intimate image, this is the most powerful tool available to you anywhere in the country.
British Columbia is one of four provinces with a statutory tort of privacy predating the recent case law elsewhere. It provides a civil action for wilful violation of privacy without claim of right, actionable without proof of damage.
Where an AWDTSG post discloses genuinely private information about you, this is the framework that applies, and it does not require the content to be an intimate image or to be false.
This matters because it does not depend on the content being an intimate image, and it does not depend on the content being false. Genuinely private information can be true and still actionable.
Reference: Jane Doe 72511 v. Morgan, 2018 ONSC 6607 (CanLII)
The federal offence applies in British Columbia as everywhere else: knowingly publishing, distributing, transmitting, selling, making available or advertising an intimate image without the depicted person’s consent, or being reckless as to consent.
It is narrow in the same way the provincial Act is narrow — it covers intimate images, not screenshots and allegations.
Reference: Jones v. Tsige, 2012 ONCA 32 (CanLII)
Where a post makes false factual allegations, ordinary defamation principles apply under the common law and the Defamation Act. The general two-year limitation period from discovery applies to social media posts.
British Columbia also has anti-SLAPP legislation, the Protection of Public Participation Act 2019, which mirrors Ontario’s approach: a defendant can move for early dismissal where the expression relates to a matter of public interest, with costs consequences if it succeeds.
This is a substantial reason to treat litigation as a last resort and platform removal as the first move.
Reference: Libel and Slander Act, RSO 1990, c L.12
Vancouver's technology sector has its own concentration risk: a comparatively small industry where professional and social circles overlap heavily, and where a post circulates through both within days. The film and production industry, heavily concentrated in the Lower Mainland, works on short contracts and reputation-driven hiring, which magnifies the effect of a single post.
Beyond those, the pattern holds across healthcare, education, real estate, hospitality and the trades — any field where individual reputation drives referrals.
Removal addresses what exists today. Reposting is most likely in the period immediately after a takedown, particularly where several members shared the original.
Continued watching of the group network is available as AWDTSG monitoring. This is a separate paid service, priced independently of removal work.
Our pricing is published on the AWDTSG removal pricing page. All prices are in US dollars. BC clients pay the listed USD amount and your card issuer applies the exchange rate — there is no separate Canadian rate and no international surcharge.
Matters involving multiple posts across several groups are quoted at consultation.
We do the operational work: locating every instance, documenting it, framing submissions against the right policy provisions, and escalating when a first attempt fails.
What we bring to BC matters specifically is knowing when the provincial statutory route is worth raising. Most reputation firms working in Canada apply a US playbook. British Columbia has a removal mechanism with genuine teeth that came into force in 2024, and knowing whether your situation falls inside or outside its definition changes what your realistic options are.
We tell clients at intake what we assess their prospects to be, including when the answer is difficult. Every matter is handled confidentially.
Only if the post includes an intimate image as the Act defines it. A dating profile screenshot with written allegations falls outside it. We assess this at intake and tell you plainly either way.
A protection order can require removal, deletion and de-indexing, and is not limited to the individual who posted. Enforcement against a large platform is not instant, and platform reporting is usually the faster first route.
Most cases see an initial platform response within 72 hours of submission. Escalated matters take longer.
No. We do not contact the poster, the group administrators, or anyone connected to you.
Yes. The network directs people to the nearest listed group, so posts about Northern BC residents typically appear in the Vancouver or Okanagan groups.
Yes. Every Canadian province and all fifty US states.
BOOK A CONFIDENTIAL BRITISH COLUMBIA AWDTSG CONSULTATION
Tell us what you have found. We will scan for everything else, tell you what we assess is achievable, and set out what it costs before you commit to anything.
British Columbia has the strongest legal mechanism for removing non-consensual content of anywhere in Canada, and most people who need it have never heard of it.
Since January 2024, a provincial tribunal has been able to issue binding orders requiring content to be deleted, de-indexed from search engines, and removed from websites and social platforms — with financial penalties for non-compliance. It applies to intimate images specifically, which means it does not cover every AWDTSG post, but where it does apply it is faster and cheaper than any court route.
MGMT Reputation handles AWDTSG post removal across British Columbia. We work through the platform’s reporting and escalation channels first, because that is usually the quickest path, and we tell you clearly when your situation is one where the statutory route is worth considering instead.