Analyzed automatically. Assessed 2026-10-05 from 565 user reviews, the store listing and its privacy label. We have not scanned the app's package, so nothing on this page was read from inside the app itself.
App Store
This analysis describes version 7.18.0 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-05 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 7.18.0, updated 2026-09-17.
Google Play
This analysis describes version 7.30.0.3831.322713 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-04 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 7.31.1.3849.6243823, updated 2026-09-30.
The app has been updated since this analysis. The findings on this page describe version 7.30.0.3831.322713, not the version now listed on the store.
Release notes for the newer versions, in the developer’s own words:
Version 7.31.1.3849.6243823 · 2026-09-30
No release notes were provided for this version.
What the analysis found
Positive evidence 1
Things this app does right, published at the same strengths as the catch list.
One source only — shown, not confirmed 3
A single kind of evidence. We publish these because withholding them would be the bigger distortion, and we do not treat any of them as a finding we stand behind.
What reviewers said
Verbatim excerpts from public store reviews, shown as corroborating user reports. They are not Appworthy audit evidence, and a quotation is not proof of the finding it sits under.
Trial converts to a charge
thought this was supposed to be a free trial offer instead the app took my credit card info and charged me $47.99, the app didn't work so I deleted it and cancelled the whole thing, which I never used and Google would not refund my money…
I signed up for what I thought was a free 3 day trial but ended up getting charged for the month subscription right away and now can't even get it refunded. worst app ever and im contacting my state AG office about this
On August 15, 2026, I signed up for the Burner: Second Phone Number app expecting a 7-day free trial. However, the receipt shows the trial ending on August 18, 2026, after which I would be charged $14.99/month—only about three days. On…
Hard to cancel
impossible to cancel
Won’t let me cancel
Nearly impossible to cancel subscription without sending an email
Reports that the ads misrepresent the app
When i opened it. It was showed for 3 days its free. And there was a payment for 1.61 cad. Then after 3 days it will be 15.81. But when i subscribe it was already took 1.61 and then within a minute 15.81. So i it was like false…
fake ad unlike text now that I can actually use for free you can't b with this shot.
stop false advertising and saying free trial then try and bill me
What this app sells
From the store listing. Billing terms are read from each purchase’s name — the stores don’t publish them — so treat them as a strong hint, not a disclosure.
How the automated analysis works
This assessment is produced automatically. Three independent signals are read — user reviews, the store listing and the store privacy disclosure — and each candidate finding is filed under the sources that support it.
No charge stands on one kind of evidence — with one published exception. A finding is either a measured fact that anyone can reproduce (an ad SDK is in the package; every subscription bills weekly; the privacy label omits a tracker we can see), or it is an interpretation — and an interpretation needs independent sources to agree before it reaches the catch list. The exception is a harm only users can see: a charge may publish from reviews alone, as “Reported by N users”, once enough reviewers raise it to clear that charge’s own published bar. That agreement rule is what replaced the human reviewer, not a model’s confidence.
There is no overall score, on purpose. A 0–99 number was published here until 2026-09-15. It was withdrawn because it discriminated too weakly to be the instrument — 44.7% of every pair of apps tied — and because a single number is a verdict where a count is an observation. What publishes instead is a row of measurements, each of which says what was counted and, where we could not look, says that instead.
Findings under One source only are real reports we do not stand behind as findings. They are shown because withholding them entirely would hide a genuine complaint, and labelled because publishing them as charges would be an accusation off a single source.
Several measurements above say “Not assessed” because no artefact we hold can answer them. A human review is what resolves those — and it can remove a favourable band as easily as add one.
Hands-on inspections are not yet open.