Honestly, have you checked if Meta is just blending your lead expectations together instead of your account being hacked? classic case of "the platform is a mess, not a conspiracy."
What you're describing happens constantly in local service trades - HVAC, roofing, plumbing, solar, you name it. nine times out of ten, it's not a competitor hijacking your campaigns. it's that users fill out five lead forms in one session, forget which company they submitted to, and mentally merge every ad into "the one with the cheap price." Especially when rivals are running aggressive loss leaders - $49 inspections, $79 tune-ups - Meta's lead form environment turns browsing into a speed-clicking competition. By the time you call, they honestly think your company was the $79 ad from three scrolls ago.
I worked with an HVAC client spending around $6,500 a month on Meta lead forms across Texas and Arizona. Competitors were hammering $49 and $79 hooks. Their close rate tanked from 31% down to 14% in five weeks. leads kept swearing "your ad said $79" even though pricing never appeared in any creative. we dug into the journey and found people submitting 4 to 7 HVAC forms in the same Meta session because the algorithm kept stacking similar service ads together.
We rebuilt everything around premium positioning - financing messaging, certified technicians, stronger qualification language inside the instant forms. lead volume dropped from about 286 per month to 221, but booked appointments jumped from 38 to 71. Close rate recovered to 29%, average ticket went from roughly $480 to $1,340, and blended ROAS climbed from around 1.6 to 4.3 within six weeks. Meta stopped optimising toward pure bargain hunters once we gave it better signals.
So - when these leads mention the $99 pricing, are they still somewhat qualified after you explain your value, or are they mostly price shoppers from the start?
