Projectsdeal (projectsdeal.co.uk / .com) markets itself as a “London-based” “No.1” dissertation and essay service with big promises and even bigger guarantees. The site literally opens with lines like, “For those in search of London’s most exquisite dissertation service,” and uses the slogan “Result is all that matters” everywhere. Ugh. If this is their website copy, what hope did I ever have.
I want to start off by making it 100% clear that this site is not who it claims to be.
It pretends to be a London based essay writing agency but actually, it’s owned by Jigar Thakkar who lives in Flat -6, 2nd Floor, Swanand So, Pune, MA 411009, India, tel. +91 20405022. If you are to believe Mr Thakkar, he’s renting offices in Canary Wharf in the same building as Deutsche Bank. Check out his fake photos on Google – there’s a generic photo of the entrance to the 10 upper bank street building (it’s a well known building so there are plenty of these pics around the web), then it turns out that the office reception area photo is actually a property up for rent in Portugal and he’s just AI’d his logo onto the reception desk. And that picture of a silver logo on the building? Check out THIS Instagram account which has EXACTLY the same images (I think it’s maybe in Iran) but oh, no silver ProjectsDeal logo. It’s all FAKE.
The site also claims it was established in 2001 which is clearly another fat lie, since the .com was purchased in 2007 and the co.uk was purchased in 2013 (check Whois).
Safe to say that this is NOT a UK agency, in case the website language didn’t already give that away.
Pricing and discounts
There’s no transparent rate card; you’re funnelled into a quote form and seasonal promos (e.g., “33% off first order”) do the heavy lifting. Even their own press puff pieces admit the platform doesn’t have fixed prices. In practice, what starts “cheap” inflates once you add normal expectations (level, speed, references). For me, the value collapsed as soon as I saw the quality (see below).
Quality of work
My order was a dissertation proposal and oh dear lord, what was I thinking. It came back looking like a template: generic aims, boilerplate methods, and citations that didn’t actually support the claims made. The lit review was surface-level, sources were dated, and the rationale felt copy-fitted to my title rather than built from it. I asked for tightening on scope and current references; the revision padded wording instead of fixing the argument. As a model to learn from, it was poor; as a springboard for real writing, completely totally unusable.
Writer expertise and qualifications
The site says it has UK-degree writers, “SCI-published” experience and even claims of a 600+ staff “family”, but provides no verifiable writer bios, publications or discipline-level profiles you can actually inspect.
Meanwhile, marketing brags that “97% of our clients achieve Merits and Distinctions.” The gap between those glossy claims and what landed in my inbox was… cavernous. And the language used on the website itself is such a giveaway, I really do not know why I wasted my money.
Delivery and reliability
Delivery skated close to the deadline and only moved after I prodded support. Draft milestones weren’t honoured, and the “we’ll beat the deadline” chest-thumping on the site didn’t tally with my timeline. When the work did arrive, it needed completely rewriting, not editing, it was literally useless – time I didn’t have because the clock had already run down.
Customer support
I couldn’t get anyone to answer the phone despite several attempts. The Whatsapp number works for messages, although expect broken English. The answers I got referenced policies, not the actual academic problems I raised (scope, method, recency of sources). The vibe was definitely not problem-solving.
Website usability and ordering process
The funnel is easy enough, but the site’s English wobbles: “Plz. enter valid mobile no.” on forms, and on another page, an utterly random “How musical is it?” line in a pricing blurb for PowerPoint work. That odd register is everywhere -headline capitalisation, salesy superlatives, over-cooked adjectives (“exquisite”). It doesn’t scream “credible academic partner.” I literally must have been drunk when I ordered.
Revisions and refund policies
This is where the red flags really start to flap. The shiny Money-Back Guarantee page says your “investment is completely risk-free” with “unlimited revisions before considering a refund”. But the Terms of Use page quietly states: “Deadline missed or work rejected: 0% (Free amendments provided instead)” – i.e., no refund if they miss the deadline or the work is unusable, just more revisions. An older PDF of their guarantees says plagiarism under 7%, while other pages boast Turnitin validation under 6% – even the thresholds don’t line up.
Anyway, I asked for a refund for the absolute shoddy s**t show of a piece I received and you can probably guess the rest. I’ve queried the transaction with my bank (Monzo) but it’s taking forever.
User reviews and reputation
The public footprint is a muddle of glitzy self-released press releases, social promos and very glowing Trustpilot pages clustered suspiciously around 5★. There’s a hysterical clearly self-authored PR Newswire released in February of this year where they claim to be “voted as the Best Dissertation Writing Service in the UK for 2025 at the prestigious Scholars’ Conference in London. Which prestigious Scholars’ Conference would that be???? It genuinely pains me that Perplexity and other AIs are buying this crap.
Thankfully there are more than a fair share of watchdog-style posts and “OSINT” blogs alleging poor quality and refund friction.
Add in satellite/microsites like sheffield-research.uk parroting the same slogans (“Result is all that matters”) naming Projectsdeal as “No.1,” and their fake “London” office pictures, and clearly you can see you’re not getting a credible UK academic service at all. Stupid me.
Final verdict
I only tried Projectsdeal because it surfaced as #1 in Perplexity and god honest’s truth I think I’d had a few too late night beers. Big mistake. Between the puffed-up guarantees that evaporate in the small print, the wobbly English on core pages, and an absolutely dissertation-proposal draft, this was a total waste of time and a lesson learned.
