A receipt from Alder Table — Riverside, 18 Wharf Road should not send a guest to Alder Table — Market, 240 Market Street. But if both branches print the same review QR code, that is exactly what can happen.
The resulting review might describe Riverside’s terrace, name a Riverside server, and complain about a Riverside meal—while appearing on Market’s Google profile. Before you question either team, scan the receipt.
For a restaurant Google review link wrong location problem, the first useful question is not “Who replied?” It is “Where did the invitation send the guest?”
Here is how to trace that route, fix future invitations, and handle a review that has already landed on the wrong branch.
Trace one receipt all the way to its destination
Alder Table is fictional, but its mistake is straightforward: someone copied Market’s receipt footer into Riverside’s point-of-sale setup. The restaurant name and address were updated. The QR code was not.
That creates two invitations that look branch-specific but lead to the same place.
Use this diagram as your inspection route. Follow the destination, not just the text printed beside the code.
START: Take one current receipt from EACH branch
│
├── RIVERSIDE RECEIPT
│ Printed branch: Alder Table — Riverside
│ Printed address: 18 Wharf Road
│ │
│ └── Scan review QR code / open restaurant review link
│ │
│ ├── Displayed restaurant name: Alder Table — Market
│ ├── Destination listing address: 240 Market Street
│ └── Destination Google profile: MARKET
│ │
│ └── MISMATCH
│ Replace Riverside's invitation with
│ Riverside's own profile-specific link or QR code.
│ Then scan a newly printed receipt again.
│
└── MARKET RECEIPT
Printed branch: Alder Table — Market
Printed address: 240 Market Street
│
└── Scan review QR code / open restaurant review link
│
├── Displayed restaurant name: Alder Table — Market
├── Destination listing address: 240 Market Street
└── Destination Google profile: MARKET
│
└── MATCH
Keep this route. Check other invitation surfaces
separately; a working receipt proves only this receipt.
The critical comparison is receipt location versus destination profile. A familiar logo, correct brand name, or neatly printed QR code does not establish a match.
Inspect what the guest actually sees
Start with a newly printed receipt, not a design file or an old screenshot. You want the invitation currently reaching guests.
Scan it with your phone’s camera. If the receipt includes a clickable link in an email or digital receipt, open that too. They may use different destinations.
Read the displayed restaurant name
Does the review form identify the correct branch?
A distinct branch name makes a mismatch obvious. Two listings both called “Alder Table” require another step. Do not assume the destination is correct because the brand name matches.
If the review form does not show the full address, navigate to the associated business listing and inspect its address. You do not need to submit a test review.
Confirm the street address and profile
For Riverside, the destination must be the profile for 18 Wharf Road, not the other Alder Table across town.
Compare the address with your verified branch records. Photos and map position can help orient you, but neither should replace the address check: two branches may share branding, menus, and photography.
Record the result plainly:
Riverside receipt → Market profile → wrong destination.
That is more actionable than “Google reviews seem mixed up.”
Follow any redirect in the middle
A restaurant review link may pass through a short URL, QR-code service, or page on your own website before reaching Google.
Check that intermediate route as well. A printed code can remain unchanged while someone edits its redirect destination.
Conversely, correcting the link on your website will not repair a QR code that points directly to the wrong Google profile. Fix the route the receipt actually uses.
Replace the invitation—not just its label
Google documents how businesses can obtain a profile-specific review link or QR code. For multi-location Google reviews, generate and identify that asset separately for each branch.
For the fictional Riverside correction:
- Select Riverside’s Business Profile and verify its address.
- Use Google’s review-request option to obtain that profile’s link or QR code.
- Replace the incorrect destination in the receipt system—or update the redirect if that is what the code uses.
- Print a new receipt and scan it again.
The fourth step is the acceptance test. Saving a setting is not proof that the guest-facing invitation changed.
Use explicit internal asset names such as Riverside — 18 Wharf Road — Google review QR, rather than “latest review code.” Then inspect other places where the same asset may have been copied: table cards, takeaway inserts, booking follow-ups, and email footers.
Keep the invitation neutral and available to guests regardless of whether their experience was positive or negative. Correct routing should make honest reviewing easier, not filter who gets asked.
An already-posted review needs a separate response
Replacing Riverside’s QR code prevents that invitation from misrouting future guests. It does not move or remove an existing review.
Treat the wrong branch review as a second task.
First, establish what you know. A reference to Riverside’s terrace is a clue, not conclusive proof. Where appropriate, check the visit details privately without requesting sensitive information in public.
If you can confirm the mismatch, explain it without blaming the guest. They may have followed your own receipt.
A useful public response acknowledges the experience, identifies the possible location mix-up, and offers a private contact route. Do not make a complaint about dinner sound like an administrative inconvenience.
If you reach the reviewer, explain that the invitation led to the wrong branch and provide the correct profile link. The reviewer controls their contribution; they may choose to delete the misplaced review and post their account on the correct profile. Do not promise that editing the review text will transfer it, or that Google will move it for you.
Use Google’s reporting process where a review violates its policies—not as a guaranteed relocation mechanism.
Make fresh invitations accurate before increasing their volume
BrightLocal’s 2026 Local Consumer Review Survey makes review freshness a timely consideration. But collecting more reviews through a misrouted invitation simply scales the error.
This walkthrough applies the visual how-to approach discussed in HubSpot’s blogging research to one concrete operator task. Content-format performance is not a promise of restaurant traffic or review growth. Your measurable result here is narrower: does each branch’s invitation reach its own profile?
Before ordering another batch of table cards or enabling another receipt footer, answer that question with a scan.
Ask OMMU for a free review-link check-up. Share each branch’s name, address, and current review link or QR-code image—without guest or payment details—and have the invitation route checked before you print it again.