Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
VW Owner Being Sued By Dealer For Posting Complaints
scott_schapiro
Member Posts: 4
Here is the link: http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=52126
Spread the word and post your support!
Tagged:
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
This is also why car owners should work within the law to resolve complaints rather than resorting to guerilla tactics. One might be tempted to believe all those stories about how someone painted a lemon on their car and parked it in front of a dealership and miraculously got that new engine they've been crying for, but more likely than not such behavior causes even more grief for everyone.
While I may not agree with the tactics, I don't agree with kinley.
Realistically, if it were against an individual, I would agree, but a business advertises. Usually the advertisement makes some claim of honesty and on and on. If a person rebutes that and it is valid, then I would think it would have to be between the person and the business to get it squared away.
If a person doesn't like something, they should be able to say they don't like it without fear of repercussions.
And besides, websites are not public forums like a streetcorner, especially when you have to register to enter them. They are more like private clubs, and a private club can throw you out if you misbehave. Stand up in a restaurant and scream THIS FOOD STINKS and see if you're not out on the sidewalk in a red hot minute.
Same like when you curse on a radio call-in program. They can censor you.
As for blocking a driveway, of course you can't lawfully do that either....but I suppose you could picket legally if you didn't obstruct anything, stayed on public property, and were careful what you wrote on your placard.
Sometimes people count on getting their way by being such a nuisance that they will be paid off to go away. And sometimes this works. This time it didn't apparently.
Getting your rights requires intelligence, cleverness and picking your best shots.
That is the crux. What would be a "fair" way to let the public know about the way I was treated so that I would be protected by the first amendment? In this case, it seems to me that the individual was simply relating his experience.
On another note, I see so many posts in TH to the effect that "I had car x and it was terrible. Do not buy car x."
Can these individuals be also sued by the manufacturer of car x?
While I wasn't raising a commotion, I did voice my opinion.
Letters to the editor in newspapers is along the same lines. There have been specific complaints about a place, thing or govt entity. These were the opinions of the person writing the letter to the editor.
There is a difference between creating a commotion or endangering people and voicing your opinion.
If I said that so and so shop treated me badly and I thought that they did bad work, then that is an opinion. If I am going to be sued because I have an opinion, then I might as well take up residency at a court house, sell off everything I own and prepare to spend alot of time in court.
As has probably been noted, I am very opinionated. LOL!
Politically correct "Freedom of speech" - You can say what you want, as long as it doesn't offend anyone. You won't know if it offends anyone until after you say it and then you will be responsible for damages to that person. So, until you can read minds, Freedom of speech means keep your mouth shut.
Blocking a driveway is different, that is a physical thing.
But now you can print pretty much what you want and say what you want on stage, again, within the bounds of the law, so we do owe Miller and Bruce a debt of gratitude (I THINK--lol!).
These laws are very complex and I don't pretend to understand all the ins and outs. But I do know that if you attack a private citizen or businessman and attempt to ruin his reputation, you'd better have your facts in good order. I also know that libel is very hard to prove. I doubt the VW dealer will be successful. The lawsuit is obviously to intimidate someone into shutting up.
One thing I always tell folks when they are dealing with someplace that is being "unjust".
Stand firm, but remain calm. If you feel your control start to slip, even slightly, walk away and regain your compsure and re-approach it from a different angle. Most often, that is enough to let them see that you will stand firm and they stand to gain more by dealing with you, then fighting it.
It is pretty clear that many jumped in with their own complaints.
His best bet is to straighten up, and watch his customer satisfaction in the future.
F'instance...let's say a poster says "Dealer X ripped me off! Dealer X is a crook!" and he posts this on 100 bulletin boards.
Seems to me that Dealer X is going to be pretty upset with this and may challenge the poster legally to prove these claims. The poster may in fact have been ripped off, but can he prove it? Also, the poster has to explain his actions in posting on 100 boards. Is it revenge? Is it malice?
So the way I see it is that you can't just be right, you have to prove you are right or shut up about it and take legal action yourself.
Very often, the noisiest and most persistant complaintants DON"T have a good legal case, and they take to the streets in frustration, or, possibly, complete ignorance as to what legal rights they do have.
You can't be a vigilante, in other words. You have to work within the law to get justice.
http://www.ripoffreport.com don't seem to worry about libel!
Mr. Shiftright
Host
Error In Script
Sorry, we have a problem. This error has been logged and will be fixed soon.
and
Edmunds Home Page
OK
The document has moved here. (here is a link which doesn't work)
Works fine with Nutscape.
I found out from one of the hosts, that you have to delete the Edmunds cookies from your IE cookie folder.
Go to My Computer, then to Windows, then to Cookies.
Find all of the cookies that say Edmunds or TownHall and delete them. Once they are deleted, then you have to log on again.
if true.....what does that tell us?????
I read the post from the VW forum, and I certainly can sympathize with "g-man" and his problems with the VW dealer. IMHO he presented his story in a reasonably well thought out, well written manner. He used proper grammer and spelling, no vulgarity, and did not threaten anyone, or any business. He simply stated his case as a warning to other potential VW buyers.
If you read the Edmunds long term road test of the Lincoln LS, you'll also find reference to various dealer experiences that the Edmunds staff had during their time with the car. Their experiences were both positive and negative, and were reported as such.
Why is it then, that if an individual states his problems it's potentially libel, but if Edmunds does it, it's OK ?? As I said, I'm not a lawyer, but isn't this a double standard ???
I'm presently involved in a dispute with a dealer that I've done a lot of business with. I'm not directly stating that I want to "cause damage" to their business because I feel they've defrauded me, but when people ask me why I'm upset, I tell them why. Indirectly, this may cause damage to their business, but I certainly hope that this doesn't define a "libel" suit.
Libel is a legal term that describes a written form of defamation, which the dictionary defines as a
"false or unjustified injury to someone's good reputation." Sometimes the word slander is used in
the same breath as libel. The two terms mean the same thing, except that slander usually refers to
defamatory statements about someone that are spoken to others rather than written in a
newspaper, magazine article, or book.
And just what is malice when it comes to proving libel? Retired Justice William J. Brennan, Jr.,
who wrote the Sullivan decision, defined it as "knowledge that the [published information] was
false" or that it was published "with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not." In other
words, public officials no longer could sue for libel simply by proving that something that had been
broadcast or printed about them was false. Now they would have to prove that a journalist had
knowingly printed false information while making little, if any, attempt to distinguish truth from lies.
You might have some evidence of the first accusation, but you'd be hard put to prove the second one seems to me.
I had problems with a Ford Windstar and Thunderbird concerning head gaskets, and I posted my complaints all over these boards. I also had documentation to back up my claims. I was never threatened by Ford. I also took my case to small claims court and won, using the same information I had posted on the boards. But libel laws are weaker for corporations than they are for individuals, the thought being that corporations have access to the media that an individual doesn't have.
From what I've read, the dealer has dropped the suit. Imagine the embarassment had the dealer sued and lost...and it's ultimately up to him to prove that the statements were false.
FWIW, I'm not a lawyer either, but that is stuff that I found researching libel and slander.
One of my favorite sites is http://www.ripoffreport.com The site allows for rebuttals from the accused party or business. As I said earlier on here, the folks posting there don't seem to worry about libel. In fact, I've even seen negative reports about law firms there. I feel that if the accusations are true and can be proven, then the accused party/business hasn't got much of a chance of winning in a libel suit.
Although the site could have a positive effect for consumers that have truly been mislead, the crudeness of some of the posts tends to take away a lot of the credibility of what the people are saying.
One reason for that is that ranting, or anger, blinds a person from an understanding how a system works and how to defeat it.
Basically, they are getting in their own way.
Who's afraid of www.sorehead.com with their 15 hits a day?
Grammar and Spelling---gee, how else are you supposed to judge what you are reading? If a person cares enough to post so as to gather support in a worthy cause, they should care enough to get the help necessary to sound coherent. There are probably lots of English-speaking people within 100 yards of his/her computer that would help them so they don't sound like illiterate lunatics. Even the simplest English can be beautiful and make sense.
Many times judgments are awarded in SCC but the people don't pay anyway, and then you have to sue them the "regular" way or get a lien or garnishee--all big pains in the butt. Small Claims Court is not going to send out the police to help you, you know.
Therefore, I still stand by my original comment, and agree totally with shiftright's additional remarks in that vein.