# Dealer criticism thread pulled.



## Glandwr (Jun 12, 2006)

If I was a member that dealt with a dealer and had a major grievance with that dealer. I and subsequently found out the there had been numerous reports of that same dealer ripping other members off. That posts had been made on here to warn others only for the OP to, be in my mind, frightened into asking them to be withdrawn I would be quite angry.

So what is the difference between MHFs and say Tripadviser or any other review site where malicious reviews seem to be routinely posted with impunity but are neutralised by the number of reviews praising the business in question. Having said that, a business that consistently gets bad reviews will either change or close down.

The idea that a dealer would shout slander at someone would repeated a conversation online without a recording as proof is quite frankly outlandish in my opinion. 

If you can’t contact Tripadvisor and demand the identity of someone who posted a derogatory review against your business why not the same for MHFs?

As I said if I thought that I had been ripped off for thousands that I wouldn’t have been if I’d have read the review would make me very angry. Online reviews of businesses are a fact of life these days. Why not for MH dealers?

Dick


----------



## dizzley (Feb 11, 2014)

*I agree*

I totally agree. I did receive some very dismal service from a Dealer, and when I later joined this site, I found just loads and loads of comments, all saying much the same thing. To be honest, if I had been pre-warned, I would not have purchased, and thereby saved myself a lot of time, money, and hassle.

If you take an advert from a Dealer, can you then have criticism of them in your forum?

Alex

ps if you want to know who the Dealer was in my case.....have a look at the Home Page


----------



## Agilityman (Aug 17, 2009)

I agree. All this looks just like the Jimmy Saville problems. Too frightened to speak out for fear of libel. The abuse (of customers in this case) goes on and on and everyone stays mum.


----------



## coppo (May 27, 2009)

I think on trip adviser you can just make an address up etc and they have then nothing to go on.

On here they have a forum that they can sue and chase etc, something definitive.

Its nice to hear a balanced view , sometimes when someone comes on and slates a dealer and then we get the dealers version its different.

Its wrong though, I know what you mean, if the dealer is any good then you get people coming on saying they have had good service etc.

Paul.


----------



## Stanner (Aug 17, 2006)

*Re: I agree*



dizzley said:


> ps if you want to know who the Dealer was in my case.....have a look at the Home Page


American Express???????????? :?


----------



## dizzley (Feb 11, 2014)

*Ah!*

As a subscriber you can have the ads switched off in some cases, and I'm sure that the web master will have rotated the ads anyway.

American Express  not unless they have a place up the A1......but then again you knew that anyway 
Rgds
Alex


----------



## Jimblob44 (Oct 26, 2013)

If any business advertises how good they are and are subsequently found to be considerably less good than they claim why is it wrong to advertise their failure on a forum.
This forum allows anyone the right to reply by simply joining and if you don't want to pay I believe you get 3 or 4 posts anyway.
Being afraid of libel should only be if you are telling porkies and if your claims cane be proved to be such (which on a "I said, he said" scenario is almost impossible unless recordings are made)

I would wan't to able to make an informed opinion about a dealer based on the actual experiences of previous customers and not on the blurb of the dealers own ads, so the origional experience of the OP in this case would have been helpful to me and if the dealer wanted to refute the OPs claim then he can be made aware of the thread and given the right to reply but deleting the thread strikes me as somewhat lillylivered, we should be free to give opinions (without it being a personal tirade) and not have the spectre of a libel case looming.


----------



## peribro (Sep 6, 2009)

If I had had a bad experience with a dealer and had been spoken to in an abrupt and offensive manner, then I would want other potential customers to be aware. Equally if I had had good service from that company then I would also want people to be aware.


----------



## pippin (Nov 15, 2007)

How about this method of "extolling" the virtues of a dealer?

"I contacted dealer X in town Y by telephone today with a query about a possible repair to the Z.

The MH is only 9 months old and I bought it S/H from the owner who bought it new from X.

The conversation on the telephone could not have been more delightful.

Pleasant, helpful, apologetic and with promises to rectify the faulty Z with absolutely no charge whatsoever and even a refund of the cost of diesel for the 500 mile round trip.

The workshop would be made available whenever I wished to arrive, even at the weekend, at my total convenience for the work to be done immediately and that any spares required would certainly be in stock just in case.

Should we wish to visit the local attractions while the repair was being carried out then a chauffered limousine would be available and refreshments would be provided - all free of charge.

So taken aback were we by such helpful promises that we decided not to take up the offer.

Instead we took the MH to a local handyman who fixed the problems on the spot and charged us only a fiver."

I wish there were emoticons for tongue-in-cheek!!!


----------



## Jamsieboy (Jan 14, 2011)

I think part of the problem is that when a post states that so and so said " whatever he is alleged to have said" it changes the game a bit. 

If a post indicates that the individual had received a poor service in their opinion that is one thing but when you start quoting an individual without evidence to support what was said in my view it is more likely to be pulled. You also leave open the potential for the poster to be pursued by the dealer if the comments about that individual are potentially slanderous (I am not saying this was the case in the thread pulled).

So I suppose it is a question of balance and the site owners have taken a view - IMHO it is always a bit risky to quote an individual unless you have an independent witness or a recording to verify your statement.


----------



## Zebedee (Oct 3, 2007)

Just for information.

When I was a Moderator (_and yes, I do miss the job - like a severe dose of haemorrhoids_!!) I got to see some of what went on behind the scenes.

On two or three occasions (_that I was aware of_) things got very nasty as a result of threads like the one under discussion, and Nuke had to do some very hasty pacifying to keep the complainants from taking legal action.

It's easy to egg others on with cries of "_I'll carry the banner_!" but when faced with possible litigation poor Freddiebooks would have been all on his own. I can't see VS doing a lot to help him out of the mire! :roll:

Having said that I am still strongly in agreement with the sentiments expressed in this thread. I think we should name and shame (_and we should take care to offer praise in equal proportions_) but it needs to be done with care . . . and it never helps when a feeding frenzy ensues and the company (_or whoever_) is tried, convicted and hung out to dry before they have had a chance to put their side of the story.

It has happened so many times before - and will continue, I have no doubt! :roll:

Dave


----------



## hogan (Oct 31, 2006)

Why not pull the "riots in Yorkshire " thread
Plenty moaning there about the council. 

Can't say boo to a goose these days. 
Let's all just lay down and get ripped off/abused and not say anything. 
Lenin would be proud


----------



## rayrecrok (Nov 21, 2008)

Hey up.

It's OK someone not directly in the fireing line pontificating and beating their breast, but if they got a solicitors letter from the said firm, me thinks they would start babbering their pants..

It's Ok to say anything you want about what happened true or not, but name names without proof you get to be on unbelievably shaky ground...

That's why the thread was pulled to protect the OP from himself, or more likely the members on here from gobbing off and making it worse, had there been no names there would have been no pack drill but that was not the case, his heart over ruled his head.

Sometimes it pays to sit back and think about any consequences of your actions, and are you willing to put your hand in your pocket to back them up.

ray


----------



## aldra (Jul 2, 2009)

my feeling is you need to be careful

No offence to the op

It's so easy to destroy someone's business online these days

I would have been happier if the OP had contacted the dealer to register his complaint and published the reply to it

Again no offence to the OP

I would have been equally upset as him

But this is a nationally read site and it needs to be seen to be fair on both sides

Aldra


----------



## barryd (May 9, 2008)

I did wonder when I saw it if it would go this way. Felt bad for the OP and it was shocking customer service.

You do however have to be careful on forums these days what you say.

I never used to care less until I started running my own forum where lets just say seems to be full of nutcases.  

I had to ban two members and some of the stuff that got posted by them was definitely Libless and you suddenly start to realise that not only the OP but YOU could be in a shed load of bother. Mind you I am sometimes the worst offender!


----------



## cabby (May 14, 2005)

Can I take it then that this company in Doncaster, did not take the opportunity to reply using this forum and decided instead to use a solicitors letter to stop the member from spreading unproven telephone conversation. Or do they have to prove they did not say this.
Makes me grateful that I live far away from the supposedly grumpy north country folk. This includes Yorkshire while I am pontificating. 

cabby


----------



## paulmold (Apr 2, 2009)

You only have to go to 'advance search' and enter the name of the dealer in 'company reports' forum, to see feedback on this dealer, mostly not good but a few to balance it the other way'


----------



## rayrecrok (Nov 21, 2008)

> cabby"]Can I take it then that this company in Doncaster, did not take the opportunity to reply using this forum and decided instead to use a solicitors letter to stop the member from spreading unproven telephone conversation. Or do they have to prove they did not say this.
> Makes me grateful that I live far away from the supposedly grumpy north country folk. This includes Yorkshire while I am pontificating.
> 
> cabby


Hmm. Nobody is defending any company, if there is any defending it is one of our members who may have put himself unintentionally in harms way, shame you can't see that, and as a by the way what you have just written is a load of tripe. :roll:

ray.


----------



## Glandwr (Jun 12, 2006)

Nonsense Ray. Health and bloody safety gone mad. Gosh I'm usually on the other end of these threads  For a defamation (libel or slander) action to be successful it must be proven to have caused harm. This can't happen if a. The claimant's reputation is at all murky, or b. it concerns the supply of goods and or services.

Now Nuke might have wanted to placate advertisers but apart from that I can't see why the rogue side of dealers should not be exposed on here as long it is the truth that is spoken. Anyone who does this has nothing to fear although I would bow to the more knowledgeable.

Dick


----------



## rayrecrok (Nov 21, 2008)

> Glandwr"]Nonsense Ray. Health and bloody safety gone mad. Gosh I'm usually on the other end of these threads  For a defamation (libel or slander) action to be successful it must be proven to have caused harm. This can't happen if a. The claimant's reputation is at all murky, or b. it concerns the supply of goods and or services.
> 
> Now Nuke might have wanted to placate advertisers but apart from that I can't see why the rogue side of dealers should not be exposed on here as long it is the truth that is spoken. Anyone who does this has nothing to fear although I would bow to the more knowledgeable.
> 
> Dick


Hey up.

I am not interested in your comments I am only interested in the poster of the original comments not getting into bother inadvertently..

So you can huff and puff as well as others but do not make it at the expense of the original poster who I am sure if he replies on this thread wishes he had never said anything, and if that is the case you and others should let it drop..

If he is still sticking his heels in then fill your boots.

ray.


----------



## Glandwr (Jun 12, 2006)

I was under the impression that the thread was pulled because of your legal advice. Maybe I was wrong. If so I apologise. If I was right what grounds would the OP have to fear?

Dick


----------



## rayrecrok (Nov 21, 2008)

> Glandwr"]I was under the impression that the thread was pulled because of your legal advice. Maybe I was wrong. If so I apologise. If I was right what grounds would the OP have to fear?
> 
> Dick


Hey up Dick.

I am surprised at your posts as you normally advice fellow members when you see a problem to take two and have re think, stand back and let common sense come to the for and maybe you will change your stance.

ray.


----------



## Glandwr (Jun 12, 2006)

Ray I seriously admire your concern for the OP, and I didn’t mean to cross swords. I do though object to a climate where we as a community (as VS now says we are  ) can’t expose the rogues and charlatans in the industry.

There is as you said the potential to lay oneself open to defamation actions on a forum. However if it is an honest report of a transaction for the sale of goods or services the onus is on the claimant to prove falsehood rather than the other way around and if there has been any suspicion of improper behaviour in the past by the claimant a claim for harm would be extremely difficult to bring.

In short if you have been done in a deal with a dealer there is nothing to stop you posting it here without fear as long as it’s true. 

I seriously believe it would be a good thing if people did so without fear, it would help others and hopefully drive the ****s out of the industry.

Dick

edited to change deformation to defamation :lol:


----------



## barryd (May 9, 2008)

> *cabby wrote: *Makes me grateful that I live far away from the supposedly grumpy north country folk. This includes Yorkshire while I am pontificating.
> 
> cabby


Bit of trolling there Cabby?  good effort!

Yorkshire folk I agree can be grumpy and cumbrians just hate everyone, even fellow Cumbrians but having worked in "That London" for three years as cities go their Rudeness takes the biscuit but I kind of like that.

Must admit I never ever found any rudeness in Eastbourne. Just loads of old confused people.


----------



## rayrecrok (Nov 21, 2008)

> Glandwr"]Ray I seriously admire your concern for the OP, and I didn't mean to cross swords. I do though object to a climate where we as a community (as VS now says we are  ) can't expose the rogues and charlatans in the industry.
> 
> There is as you said the potential to lay oneself open to defamation actions on a forum. However if it is an honest report of a transaction for the sale of goods or services the onus is on the claimant to prove falsehood rather than the other way around and if there has been any suspicion of improper behaviour in the past by the claimant a claim for harm would be extremely difficult to bring.
> 
> ...


Hey up.

You can say owt but the moment you name names the game changes dramatically..

ray


----------



## peribro (Sep 6, 2009)

Text deleted


----------



## Penquin (Oct 15, 2007)

I read (and contributed to) the thread and recall that the OP did express considerable concerns before he posted about whether he should or should not post.....

I have not seen any "official" or "unofficial" announcement as to why the thread was pulled and I simply wonder whether the OP of that thread had a rethink about the advisability of his posting as has been said, there have been suggestions of solicitors letters, threats of litigation and so on, but is that not conjecture about what MIGHT have happened?

We know that the thread is no longer visible (it will still exist locked in a thread which only the admin and such like can access in order to preserve it unchanged in case the contents are needed for a legal event), but we do not have any proof as to WHY it was pulled.

My belief is simply that the OP rethought and decided that the way the thread was going MIGHT have caused even more anger and MIGHT have reflected badly on a variety of people and organisations including MHF.

Are we not in danger of building an entire castle on non-existent foundations? We do not KNOW why the thread was pulled - it may well have been at the direct request of the OP (who I am not criticising at all) who decided he was unhappy with it and had changed his mind about the way that he had posted it......

As I said on that thread, we once again only have one side to comment on..........

once again we are at risk of reading in things that have not happened, unless a company instructed a solicitor and served such advice within hours...... we do not know why it was pulled, and will probably never know.

If the company had not been named then it probably would not have been pulled, but naming it makes it a specific target for many.... remember "lots of little holes" and the unpleasant comments directed at that company....

Thinking before posting is always advisable with hindsight.......

Dave :?


----------



## oldun (Nov 10, 2005)

Jimblob44 said:


> If any business advertises how good they are and are subsequently found to be considerably less good than they claim why is it wrong to advertise their failure on a forum.


I don't think it is a case of right or wrong it is simply a case of "do the forum owners want to get tied up the courts over the accuracy of the posting".

Court costs, even if you win, can be horrendous.


----------



## ob1 (Sep 25, 2007)

What if it's the other way round? 

If a dealer so twists the facts in writing to you about your complaint that it makes you out to be a liar, which you can prove is not the case, is he libelling you? In other words does a libel have to be broadcast to all and sundry?


----------



## Glandwr (Jun 12, 2006)

As I said at the beginning of the thread. If the post is about the interaction between a dealer and customer, neither side can bring a defamation action for damages (libel or slander). Such actions CANNOT be brought about comments or reports of commercial transactions.

It’s a bit like the invoices issued by the carparking cowboys. All bluster! If there is a rogue trader ripping off MHers we should know. Of course they’ll bluster, just ignore them!

Dick


----------



## oldun (Nov 10, 2005)

Glandwr said:


> As I said at the beginning of the thread. If the post is about the interaction between a dealer and customer, neither side can bring a defamation action for damages (libel or slander). Such actions CANNOT be brought about comments or reports of commercial transactions.
> 
> It's a bit like the invoices issued by the carparking cowboys. All bluster! If there is a rogue trader ripping off MHers we should know. Of course they'll bluster, just ignore them!
> 
> Dick


The problem I have is - who is telling the truth and who telling the lies.

In this type of case we are being asked to accept that the complainant is telling the truth and the supplier is telling lies. It's a big step to take without having seen some evidence to back up the complaint.

In general both sides will be telling explaining the situation so that their case is seen in the best light.

I am usually swayed when there are a considerable number of complaints against a company.

Please note I am not suggesting that the OP is not telling the truth in this particular case.


----------



## ob1 (Sep 25, 2007)

Glandwr said:


> As I said at the beginning of the thread. If the post is about the interaction between a dealer and customer, neither side can bring a defamation action for damages (libel or slander). Such actions CANNOT be brought about comments or reports of commercial transactions. Dick


---------------------------------

Dick - Did you mean to say that action cannot be brought 'So long as the comments are true'?

Ron


----------



## Pudsey_Bear (Sep 25, 2008)

I've been reading this thread with interest, and frankly the very fact it exists pi$$e$ me off greatly.

I had an issue with a local Bradford dealer when I first joined and had to retract my comments in MHF due to the threat of legal action from this swine, despite it being true and us losing thousands, the fact I was telling the truth means nothing if you don't have the money or the strength to fight it, we were at a low ebb family wise at this point otherwise this *anker would not have got away with it.

Anyway back to this thread, on the home page are lots of forum choices, one of which is Company Reports Company Reports, with the comment 

" Subscriber Access Only. Had good service from a mh related company or vice versa had very poor service, then report on it in here. Check our Dealers Database for ratings of individual Motorhome Dealers or Check our Company Directory for other mh related companies" see pic also so the boss can't say it didn't exist (I trust no one) as you can see.

What is the point of having this thread, if we can't voice an opinion or actually condemn a dealer for whatever reason, this was one of the reasons I joined this site, it had integrity, if it loses that then I think despite the wonderful members, I'd rather spend my money elsewhere on a site which works and values me and my opinion if I get good or bad service.

I think it is high time that the new owners of this site said just where we're going, so I can decide if I want to go along or not.


----------



## ob1 (Sep 25, 2007)

Kev/Liz - I agree with most of what you say. However, these type of threads are too thin on the ground on reports to be of any good. I note that Brownhills and Marquis both scored 10 stars in the section that I looked at. Enough said.


----------



## Penquin (Oct 15, 2007)

AFAIK we have had no explanation as to why the thread was pulled, was it pulled at the request of the OP (who was having doubts about posting it BEFORE he did), or was it pulled at the request of the company concerned?

I do not know and AFAIK no-one else other than the admin and perhaps the OP or the company does know.....

So I do not believe that there can be any justification in building a massive thread on things that we do not know......

Maybe I am being naive .........

but getting worked up about a conversation that allegedly took place seems very difficult to prove either way - one person may believe they are being forthright and direct, the other that they are being rude and aggressive - I cannot judge as I was not there and was not party to both sides of the conversation...... 

Life is too short to dwell on such "What if's", but we do all need to be careful about what we type - and we need to be prepared to demonstrate it's truthfulness if challenged - which is why a conversation is difficult to judge.....

Dave


----------



## coppo (May 27, 2009)

The OP had second thoughts and thought he may get sued, especially after a couple of members told him to be careful.

The OP PM'ed me on the 26.6.14 11.09am to ask me to edit my post as I mentioned the name of the dealer in replying to him, I duly did this.

You do have to be careful but I see where Kev is coming from, what's the post of having a company reports if you can't write an experience/opinion.

Maybe you need to have proof of some sort, emails, letters, bank statements etc.

Paul.


----------



## mistycat (Jan 28, 2014)

Kev_n_Liz said:


> A I'd rather spend my money elsewhere on a site which works and values me and my opinion if I get good or bad service.


KEV,
Get a cup of tea man,
we value your opion, it will all blow over then we can get back to fun,
lifes to short, if you go else where, i will need to rejoin SBMCC just to annoy you!!!   
Misty


----------



## Pudsey_Bear (Sep 25, 2008)

I think the idea of a company reports forum was a good one, but it needs to be completely un-interfered with by the owners, they are not responsible for the post of the members, no court would hold them so, how could they in reality, it is a forum not a dictatorship.

It leave us with the problem of how do we expose shoddy workmanship and dodgy dealers.

Suggesting I go for a cup of tea is just a bit insulting Mysty, even if said in jest.


Perhaps the forum should be replaced with a link to a website like thihttp://www.rip-off.co.uk/nameshame.htms or grow some.


----------



## listerdiesel (Aug 3, 2012)

If 'dodgy' practices weren't so prevalent in the motorhome/caravan industry, we wouldn't have need for such things, but sadly it is and we do.

One-sided tirades against a dealer without the chance of an open reply is not fair or good for both sides, it needs to be an engaged discussion with specifics being mentioned and addressed.

Peter


----------



## Pudsey_Bear (Sep 25, 2008)

I think the main problem is the MH owners comments are made in a fit of temper, and possibly out of ignorance of how a MH works and what is possible to do and what is not, perhaps even under warranty.

Some might even be a misunderstanding of expectation and reality, a dealer can only do so much to make things right, and some might expect a new van back, a dealer is in it for a profit so isn't going to replace a hob if only one burner is kaput, they will just fix that one burner and no more, unless they are the type which go above and beyond and quickly out of business.

It is a minefield and emotions on both sides come into play, but we must have a place to make truly bad service etc known to a wider audience, without it being pulled by the site owners, but has to factual, and made honestly.


----------



## Zebedee (Oct 3, 2007)

> Kev_n_Liz said:- . . . without it being pulled by the site owners, but has to factual, and made honestly.


I agree Kev, but it wasn't pulled by the site owners, was it?

I think this is the thread everyone is banging on about - and the only "pulling" was done by the OP._ (Now that it seems members can edit their own post with no time limit.)_

http://www.motorhomefacts.com/ftopicp-2173105.html#2173105

If this is the right thread, the subscripts show who did what.

Dave

P.S. If I have got it all wrong, please feel free. I can take it!! :lol:


----------



## PF13 (Aug 2, 2013)

Hey, I must congratulate you all, we have got all the way to page 5 of this post and no one has mentioned Dannums yet, oh hang on, sh.....t


----------



## Pudsey_Bear (Sep 25, 2008)

Yes this one may have been pulled by the OP but others in the past have not, and I don't think should be, we still have freedom of speech in this country and if someone comes onto this site and lies about something, then they must take the consequences, however the site should do nothing other than provide a platform otherwise delete the company reports forum altogether if we're only allowed to say good things and nothing else.


----------



## oldun (Nov 10, 2005)

Kev_n_Liz said:


> Yes this one may have been pulled by the OP but others in the past have not, and I don't think should be, we still have freedom of speech in this country and if someone comes onto this site and lies about something, then they must take the consequences, however the site should do nothing other than provide a platform otherwise delete the company reports forum altogether if we're only allowed to say good things and nothing else.


In principal i agree with what has been said but you may be asking the forum owners to put themselves in such a position that they find themselves paying out huge damages for libel.

We cannot expect them to behave in such a manner.

If it were me i would err on the side of caution.


----------



## Pudsey_Bear (Sep 25, 2008)

I'm no lawyer, but Nuke wasn't stupid, if he put the means in place to complain or praise a company, I'm damned sure he worded the T&Cs so that he would not be held liable for any comments made by members, and we agree to that when we register.


----------

