Done-for-you App Store & Google Play rescue for founders who shipped with Lovable, Cursor, Replit, FlutterFlow, Expo or AI agents. We find the real reason, fix the blocker, write your reviewer reply, and hand you a resubmit-ready build — usually within 48 hours.
No login. No call. You keep your developer account — we never ask for your password.
Built with the tools your customers use
You built something real and got back Guideline 4.3 or 5.1.2(i) or 2.5.2 with no clear instructions. There's no fixed Apple deadline — but every day you guess wrong your launch stalls, and resubmitting blind risks a worse rejection. You don't need a $200/hr agency. You need the one specific fix and the right words to send back.
On November 13, 2025 Apple added Guideline 5.1.2(i): if your app sends personal data to a third-party AI — OpenAI, Anthropic's Claude, Google's Gemini — you must clearly disclose that sharing and get explicit in-app consent before the data leaves the device. Most AI-built apps show no prompt at all, because the AI that built the app never added one.
What we do: add the compliant consent flow, fix your App Privacy answers, and write the reviewer reply that points to exactly where you comply. Mechanical, verifiable, covered by our cited-reason Fix guarantee.
Paste Apple or Google's exact message + a build/repo link. Free triage tells you the real guideline and which path fits. No card.
For code-verifiable blockers we make the actual fix — consent flows, permissions, metadata, account-deletion — and hand you a clean diff or build.
You get the exact reviewer reply letter to paste into Resolution Center, plus a resubmit checklist.
Start free. Then: understand it, fix it, rush it, or audit before you ever submit.
See what's wrong, instantly
Paste your rejection and we tell you the real guideline being enforced and which path fits. No card.
Best if: You just got rejected and want clarity.
Know exactly what's wrong
A human review of the exact rejection: what's wrong, and whether it's a quick fix or needs a product change. Credited toward a Fix.
Best if: You want a clear answer before spending more.
One clear, code-verifiable blocker
A single mechanical fix — privacy manifest, permission string, metadata, a broken link — plus your reviewer reply letter.
Covers the cited mechanical issue — not store approval.
Best if: One straightforward, verifiable rejection.
The common case
Things like the 5.1.2(i) AI-consent flow, in-app account deletion, or IAP wiring, plus the reviewer reply letter.
Covers the cited mechanical issue — not store approval.
Best if: A typical AI-built-app rejection.
Multiple or deeper blockers
Several issues at once, or a deeper code/entitlement change, plus the reviewer reply. The guarantee covers the cited mechanical parts.
Covers the cited mechanical issue — not store approval.
Best if: Multiple cited issues or a deeper change.
Front of the queue
Priority turnaround in 24–48 hours for a launch, demo, or investor deadline. The fix + reply, fast.
Covers the cited mechanical issue — not store approval.
Best if: You're on a hard deadline.
Reduce rejection risk before you submit
A focused pre-submission check of the traps that reject AI-built apps — privacy manifest, AI-consent, account deletion, metadata.
Best if: Submitting soon and want fewer surprises.
Reduce rejection risk before you submit
A thorough pre-submission review across the guidelines, with a prioritized fix list, so you go in as prepared as possible.
Best if: A first submission you want to get right.
Not sure which? Run the free triage — it tells you the exact guideline and the right tier. A paid diagnosis is credited toward your fix. We sell fix + resubmission support, never guaranteed approval.
Illustrative examples — we're onboarding our first founders. Real reviews appear here as they come in.
“Hit 5.1.2(i) and had no idea what Apple wanted. They added the consent flow, wrote the reply, and I was approved on the next try.”
“Rejected for the privacy manifest. Fixed and resubmitted in two days — clear diff, exact reviewer letter.”
“The honest diagnosis saved me: my 4.3 rejection needed a product change, not a quick fix. No upsell.”
“Account-deletion rejection cleared, plus the exact letter to paste into Resolution Center. Smooth.”
“Ran the pre-submit audit before my first submission and passed first try. Huge relief.”
“Fast, plain-English, and they never touched my Apple password. Back in the store in 48h.”
“Hit 5.1.2(i) and had no idea what Apple wanted. They added the consent flow, wrote the reply, and I was approved on the next try.”
“Rejected for the privacy manifest. Fixed and resubmitted in two days — clear diff, exact reviewer letter.”
“The honest diagnosis saved me: my 4.3 rejection needed a product change, not a quick fix. No upsell.”
“Account-deletion rejection cleared, plus the exact letter to paste into Resolution Center. Smooth.”
“Ran the pre-submit audit before my first submission and passed first try. Huge relief.”
“Fast, plain-English, and they never touched my Apple password. Back in the store in 48h.”
Most Fixes are delivered within 48 hours, and we prioritize anything tied to a launch date. Apple sets no hard response deadline — but a stale rejection stalls your launch, and a weak resubmission can earn a worse one, so getting the correct fix and reply quickly is what matters.
No — building with AI is fine. The problem is AI builders almost never add the new compliance pieces stores now require, especially the 5.1.2(i) third-party-AI consent flow. That's the gap we close.
No one honestly can — Apple and Google decide approval, and a resubmitted build gets a full re-review. What we guarantee on a Fix is that we resolve the specific mechanical reason they cited, or you don't pay. See the guarantee.
Never. You invite our own account with least-privilege, time-boxed access you control and we remove at close — or you apply our diff yourself.
Paste it in — free diagnosis, the real guideline, and which path fits. Two minutes.