Common issues that may lead to the removal of Android and iPhone apps from app stores.
Failure to provide an account deletion feature can cause issues with the app store.
A common mistake when developing apps that allow account creation is failing to provide a clear, accessible method for users to request the deletion of their account and associated data. Google Play policies mandate that if an app allows account creation, it must also provide a way to request account deletion—either within the app itself or via a relevant web resource linked to the app. Crucially, a deletion request entails more than merely disabling or hiding the account; the associated data must be handled in accordance with data policy requirements, subject to limited exceptions for data retained for legitimate reasons, such as legal obligations or fraud prevention. Consequently, a non-functional deletion link or one that leads to an error page can cause problems during the review process; similarly, a merely superficial option that does not actually execute the deletion fails to meet the requirement's intent. Therefore, the deletion link should be tested on various devices and outside the development environment to ensure the page functions correctly and the request steps are clear to the user. Furthermore, the system must clearly define which data is to be deleted to prevent scenarios where an account is removed while associated data remains unprocessed. It is best to plan this functionality during the initial database design phase rather than adding it at the project's end, as a proper deletion process may require linking the account across multiple tables, services, and external databases. Finally, the "Data Safety" information on Google Play must be updated to accurately reflect the app's actual mechanisms; inconsistencies between the app and the data submitted to the store can trigger additional reviews or policy-related enforcement actions.
Unnecessary Permissions and Their Impact on App Approval
Mobile applications require certain permissions to enable specific functions—such as camera access, location services, notifications, or file management. However, issues arise when an app requests permissions that are not clearly linked to the functionality it offers the user. Since permissions grant access to sensitive resources and data, app stores closely scrutinize how these permissions are used and their relevance to the app's core purpose. Unjustified permission requests can lead to complications during the review process or result in a requirement to modify the app before approval. Furthermore, the use of third-party SDKs can introduce permissions or data collection processes that were not initially apparent to the project team; therefore, it is essential to vet all integrated libraries and services and verify the necessity of each permission. Permissions should not be requested immediately upon app launch without a clear, user-understandable reason; instead, it is best to link the request to the specific function requiring it. For instance, when a user interacts with a camera-dependent feature, the reason for needing camera access can be explained before the actual permission prompt appears. This approach clarifies the user experience and helps minimize unnecessary access requests. Permissions must also be reviewed with every app update, as features may be removed while obsolete permissions remain in the project code. Reviewing permissions prior to publication allows for the identification and removal of unused or unjustified elements. Finally, engaging a software development company to review the app's entire architecture helps ensure that requested permissions genuinely align with features intended for the end-user, thereby reducing the likelihood of issues stemming from access requests that are either unnecessary or cannot be clearly justified by the developer.
Handling Violating Content in User-Generated Content Apps
An app’s responsibility increases when it allows users to create posts, upload photos or videos, or write comments, as the content is no longer entirely under the app team's control. Consequently, such apps require clear tools to manage user-contributed content and handle reports and violations. Apple specifies that apps featuring user-generated content must implement appropriate mechanisms to filter unacceptable content, enable reporting, block abusive users, and address content-related concerns in a timely manner; serious or repeated violations can lead to the app's removal. Therefore, it is insufficient for a company to simply implement a posting feature without providing a system for reporting, blocking, or moderation. Instead, a comprehensive content management workflow must be designed—spanning from the moment of posting through to user interaction and reporting. This workflow might include tools for reporting posts, accounts, or comments, alongside a review mechanism that assists management in taking appropriate action, such as blocking repeat offenders. Community guidelines must be clearly defined so users understand what content is permitted and what is prohibited. Furthermore, the expected volume of content should be considered when designing the technical infrastructure, as a growing user base results in a higher volume of posts requiring management. Designing a secure, organized content system from the outset minimizes potential issues that could arise during the app review process or after its public launch.
Apps that stop working or don't get proper updates
Removing an app may not always be related to a clear violation, such as privacy or content. Old or unsupported apps can become subject to actions related to them no longer working as they should or are no longer compatible with the platform’s requirements. Within the App Improvement Program, Apple explains that it reviews apps to ensure they work as expected, follow current guidelines, and are updated. Developers may be contacted before taking actions related to removal in cases to which the program applies. Therefore, launching the app does not mean the end of the programming company’s responsibility upon publishing the first version. Rather, there must be a plan for maintenance and periodic updates. Operating systems are constantly changing, and programming interfaces and methods for dealing with permissions and store requirements may change. Therefore, an application that works well today may need future modifications to maintain its compatibility. Crashes, user reviews, and problems that appear after updates must be monitored. It is important that the application be tested on recent versions of operating systems and devices that the project targets. Store requirements should also be reviewed periodically because policies may change. In July 2026, Google announced changes in some policy requirements with time periods for updating, which demonstrates the importance of following official announcements rather than relying. On legacy requirements, maintenance is not just an optional improvement but part of application lifecycle management.
