Yes. I would include that point, but phrase it carefully so you’re taking responsibility without admitting to things that aren’t accurate.
Here is a strong Trustpilot response:
We take customer feedback seriously, and when we make a mistake, we stand behind it and work to correct it.
The statement in this review that our company is “under investigation by the U.S. Department of Transportation” and that we had “15 complaints with the DOT in August alone” is not supported by the official FMCSA record currently available for Global Elegance Moving & Logistics LLC (USDOT 4355323 / MC 1703504). The official FMCSA record shows our USDOT status as ACTIVE, with authorized operating authority, and it does not list a safety rating or review/investigation date.
We also want to address the statement that “5 negative reviews” were removed. We do not control Trustpilot or Google and do not have the ability to simply remove reviews because they are negative. Reviews can be subject to each platform’s own policies and moderation process.
Most importantly, when a customer has a legitimate issue, we don’t run from it. We address it. We have worked to resolve customer concerns, learn from mistakes, and improve our processes. We are not claiming that every customer has had a perfect experience. We are saying that when something goes wrong, we stand behind our company and make a genuine effort to fix it.
We welcome legitimate criticism, but statements presented as facts should be supported by reliable evidence. Customers deserve accurate information when choosing a moving company.
Global Elegance Moving & Logistics
One thing I’d change from your wording is “the 5 bad reviews have been resolved.” Unless you have documentation showing all five were actually resolved, say “we have worked to resolve customer concerns” instead. That is harder for someone to challenge.
The official FMCSA page also explains that consumer complaints are submitted to the National Consumer Complaint Database and can be one source FMCSA uses when deciding which companies to investigate; a complaint itself is not proof that a company is under investigation.