CC Magazine letter re deposit problems

[anotherDavid]

In this months magazine there is a letter detailing the extreme difficulties that the writer had recovering a large deposit made at the Oct NEC show after they had reconsidered the purchase (just 6 hours later). It took legal action to get the dealer to respond and refund in line with his legal obligation to honour a 7 day cooling off period.

Its unsuprising that the dealer is not named but it would have very useful to the rest of us.

Dave

 

[Parksy]

There are some very good reasons why the dealer wouldn't be named Dave.

If the dealer had been named in the magazine although it might have made prospective buyers think twice the Caravan Club could have found themselves defending a libel or defamation action in court.

We on this forum face the same situation which is why Haymarket insist that the rules which forbid the 'naming and shaming' of dealers involved in disputes with forum members are strictly adhered to.

Any magazines which are edited or internet forums which are moderated are deemed in law to have published the content which they consist of.

When a dispute arises such as the case with the Caravan Club member the 'publisher' only has access to one set of 'facts' which may be disputed by the other side.

To start naming names would be very risky because even if a defamation action was successfully defended time, effort and cost would still be involved which are easily avoided by not publishing names.

At least they highlighted the case to let everyone know what their rights are in disputes such as this.

 

[anotherDavid]

I know why but its still a pity that very bad practice is protected in this way. I know also that the general public can be a real pain changing thier minds or making unreasonable complaints against perfectly ok dealers and quite honestly some of the "faults" that get described on this forum are petty in the extreme but this letter stands to throw suspicion on quite a small group of exibitors and it doesnt seem right that they all get tared withn the same brush but I know I am wasting my breath.

Dave

 

[Parksy]

I agree that the minority of dealers who do not live up to expected standards are in many ways 'protected' but the legal system is to blame for making it too risky for them to be publicly exposed.

The consumer groups have the resources and the remit to take these dodgy dealers on and they ought to be pursued by these organisations more vigorously.

The only thing that we as a forum can do is to make sure that members know their rights, allow advice to be offered and to highlight good reputable dealers and service providers so that they receive more custom by recommendations.

 

[Northwood]

Parky

I have been trying to take one dealer to task for the past year

I have involved the assistance of Fair Trading following the advice of your members and even they are experiencing difficulty dealing with the dealer. What chance to we the members have against such dealer, if we are not even alload to try and protect each other by relating our stories and naming names.

 

[Parksy]

Hi Bob

You are allowed to relate your story on this forum and if you have received advice from members of Practical Caravan forum then at least some good has come from your posting on the forum.

David's original point is about the Caravan Club so questions about their rules should be taken up with them not us.

Trying to 'protect each other' by 'naming names' is in direct contravention of the rules of this forum.

There are good reasons for this.

What means do we as a forum have for checking facts?

Who would check the facts?

Who would fund the cost of lawyers if a court case was brought against owners of this forum for defamation or libel?

Why would an owner of an internet forum want to embark on a costly legal excersise in the first place?

The best chance that members of any forum has when in dispute with a dealership or service provider is to take advice from forum members, learn from others but the settling or investigation of any dispute is not and never has been part of our remit, this is a forum not a solicitors.

 

[Northwood]

Hi Bob

You are allowed to relate your story on this forum and if you have received advice from members of Practical Caravan forum then at least some good has come from your posting on the forum.

David's original point is about the Caravan Club so questions about their rules should be taken up with them not us.

Trying to 'protect each other' by 'naming names' is in direct contravention of the rules of this forum.

There are good reasons for this.

What means do we as a forum have for checking facts?

Who would check the facts?

Who would fund the cost of lawyers if a court case was brought against owners of this forum for defamation or libel?

Why would an owner of an internet forum want to embark on a costly legal excersise in the first place?

The best chance that members of any forum has when in dispute with a dealership or service provider is to take advice from forum members, learn from others but the settling or investigation of any dispute is not and never has been part of our remit, this is a forum not a solicitors.

Thanks Parksy

 

[Northwood]

Thanks for the reply Parsky, its just that I feel so bitter about one individual company,and wonder how just how many other people have experience their after sales nightmare.

I appreciate the forums position in law, and will abide by the forums rules at all times

Bob

 

[RogerL]

So a magazine can make up stories and make unfounded allegations against an individual and defend any court action as "freedom of the press" BUT readers of the magazine can't make allegations, even when well-founded, against an advertiser in that magazine?

The press, in general, is very one-sided, don't you think?

 

[Dustydog]

Oh dear , what a shame Dave and Bob have had these bad experiences.

Dave,

Personally I have never purchased a new caravan at any of the shows nor will I ever do so. On the day the price may seem good, but that's it.

My own local dealer has always given us top px and good prices comparable with the best at show.

Did you pay the large deposit on you credit card?

There are many excellent reputable dealers dotted around the country who can be openly named here.Maybe the list needs updating?

So for me it's Chiping Sodbury caravans, Swindon Caravans, Golden Castle Gloucester get good press, and of course Read of Blackburn have done well and been very helpful to a lot of people on here.

Cheers

Dustydog

 

[Parksy]

I understand and entirely sympathise with members like Bob who feel let down or cheated when things have gone wrong.

Members can give details of the problems and receive advice from fellow forum members or just get things off their chests if it helps.

Roger L wrote:

 

[Dave_374330759]

Can I add caravan World up near Colchester as worthy of mention as a good firm to do business with. We've bought three vans from them. Got good value, excellent service and they are nice people to deal with as well.

 

[RogerL]

I understand and entirely sympathise with members like Bob who feel let down or cheated when things have gone wrong.

Members can give details of the problems and receive advice from fellow forum members or just get things off their chests if it helps.

Roger L wrote:

 

[Hamer_5041128]

After 26 years and 8 new caravans all from the same dealer i can fully recommend Golden Castle Caravans at Stavrton airport.

From my home to Golden Castle is a 340 mile round trip, but worth every penny in time and money.

They sell quite a few makes of caravans so you have a good choice.

Quite simply if i see a particular make and model which i like at a show, if it is not sold by my dealer i do not buy it.

I have said many times in the past on this forum, a good reliable dealer is worth their weight in gold.

Hamer

 

[MarkE]

Does the 7 day cooling off period apply for items bought at an exhibition? I used to (what feels like a long time ago now...) work for an online sales company and I thought it only applied for "Mail Order" items (i.e. Telephone, Online as well).

Libel laws in the UK are VERY one sided. If you accuse someone of lying, it is up to you to prove they are lying, rather than it being up to them to prove they are telling to truth! So you could run your mouth, advertising any claims you wanted and if anyone publish anything to say you are lying, you sue them for defamation! Search google for the recent "BCA v Simon Singh" case if you don't believe me!

 

[Parksy]

If a person was prosecuted for theft the charge is the 'accusation' and the prosecution must prove guilt.

The defendant doesn't have to prove their innocence and is deemed to be innocent until proven guilty.

If a forum member accuses a caravan dealer of lying or cheating it is up to him to prove his case via a court, in other words 'the accused' doesn't have to prove their innocence.

The libel law as far as it affects this forum means that allegations, disputes or complaints against named dealers or service providers cannot appear on the forum.

Because the forum utilises moderators it is 'edited' in the eyes of the law.

Therefore if an unproven accusation appears regarding a named person or company the forum has allowed this accusation to have been 'published' because in law moderated user generated content on a forum such as this is publishing.

The forum would be complicit in damaging the reputation or livelihood of those accused and could face damages claims or at the very least expensive legal bills.

Many of our members complaints seem genuine and I for one sympathise but because no mechanism exists to prove or disprove allegations appearing on the forum, no staff are employed to check facts and no sums of money are available to pay such staff the moderators of this forum are obliged to treat every complaint, dispute or allegation as unproven and immediately delete those which name individuals, organisations or companies regardless of our or the members feelings or suppositions.

Of course this doesn't help the caravan buyer who might have been cheated in some way and who is then denied the chance to air their frustration on this forum or to 'warn others'.

Moderators are sometimes accused of 'protecting magazine advertisers', being part of a 'cosy arrangement' and so forth which possibly stems from the understandable frustration of an exasperated caravan owner but the explanations that I have given are genuinely the instructions and advice that I sought and received from Haymarket Publishing legal specialists.

There are no rules to prevent consumer or anecdotal advice being exchanged from when other members have faced similar situations as long as names are left out.

The forum positively welcomes recommendations for reputable dealers and service providers, those who meet acceptable standards of service and customer relations deserve to gain business from these word of mouth recommendations.

 

[Northwood]

Take a look at this site for reference on the points of law surrounding the Defamation.

HTTP: //WWW.THOMSON.LAW.CO.UK/TEXT/DEFAMATION.HTM

My question would be if members photograph a fault with a caravan ie, something badly fitted or a damp issue, or an area of the van causing issue. Would showing a picture be in breach of the law or company policy.

Not so long back I posted a photograph that clearly showed a problem with a badly fitted window seal, but I made no reference to the dealer or the manufacturer, but the photograph was rejected from the forum.

Only asking Parsky.

 

[MarkE]

Interesting point, could you call a photo subjective? But even if it was brand new van, how could you prove damage wasn't caused by the end user, or by someone moving it around before you bought it?

I guess it is just simpler for the forum to have a blanket rule, avoids all problems!

 

[Parksy]

Hi Bob

Thompsons are a law firm well known for acting in defamation and libel cases and the definitions given are as far as I can tell accurate and current.

As for the photograph I have no knowledge or recollection of the situation at the time and so unfortunately I can't answer your question properly without knowing the full details.

For all that I know the photograph might have been rejected because of issues about size, on the other hand if you were in dispute with a company and had mentioned this the moderator might have made the decision that discretion is the better part of valour and removed the photo to avoid the possibility of the Haymarket becoming involved via this forum.

As Mark has mentioned, it is simpler to have a blanket rule because moderators are not experts and can't take chances.

 

[Northwood]

Hi Bob

Thompsons are a law firm well known for acting in defamation and libel cases and the definitions given are as far as I can tell accurate and current.

As for the photograph I have no knowledge or recollection of the situation at the time and so unfortunately I can't answer your question properly without knowing the full details.

For all that I know the photograph might have been rejected because of issues about size, on the other hand if you were in dispute with a company and had mentioned this the moderator might have made the decision that discretion is the better part of valour and removed the photo to avoid the possibility of the Haymarket becoming involved via this forum.

As Mark has mentioned, it is simpler to have a blanket rule because moderators are not experts and can't take chances.

Cheers Mate

 

[Northwood]

Interesting point, could you call a photo subjective? But even if it was brand new van, how could you prove damage wasn't caused by the end user, or by someone moving it around before you bought it?

I guess it is just simpler for the forum to have a blanket rule, avoids all problems!

I agree.

 

[whitetop]

Why would the dealer not be named. It is a legal decision and is most likely (unless a gaging order was issued....very unlikely)..freely available in court returns if anyone wanted to look for it. The information is in the public domain.

To use the excuse that "we might get sued" etc is rather childish, given the above

 

[Parksy]

I don't know which instance you were referring to David but the short and simple answer to your question 'Why would the dealer not be named' is that forum etiquette which form the rules of this particular forum expressly forbids the naming of any dealer or caravan park in connection with a complaint against them regardless of the individual circumstances.

I've tried very hard to explain the situation that moderators of this forum are in. I've also tried to show why the owners of this forum have no intention of becoming involved in disputes or complaints even if the information is in the public domain.

If you still regard my honest attempts at explanation as a childish excuse then nothing that I could write here would persuade you that we are doing our best to act in good faith and according to the instructions given to moderators by the forum owners so further explanations or discussion on my part is pointless.

 

[whitetop]

I don't know which instance you were referring to David but the short and simple answer to your question 'Why would the dealer not be named' is that forum etiquette which form the rules of this particular forum expressly forbids the naming of any dealer or caravan park in connection with a complaint against them regardless of the individual circumstances.

I've tried very hard to explain the situation that moderators of this forum are in. I've also tried to show why the owners of this forum have no intention of becoming involved in disputes or complaints even if the information is in the public domain.

If you still regard my honest attempts at explanation as a childish excuse then nothing that I could write here would persuade you that we are doing our best to act in good faith and according to the instructions given to moderators by the forum owners so further explanations or discussion on my part is pointless.

Yes, Parksy, I am aware of the "forum etiquette" rules....

however, if a decision is made in a court, then the law allows the decision to be available in the public domain.(unless the judge issues a gagging order)

Given the subject of the OP, the dealership was found at fault, so how could they possibly say that publishing their name would be libelious or defamatory. More like factual.

Your earlier post

What means do we as a forum have for checking facts?

Who would check the facts?

Who would fund the cost of lawyers if a court case was brought against owners of this forum for defamation or libel?

Why would an owner of an internet forum want to embark on a costly legal excersise in the first place?

The court results...

The courts have already decided

Would not apply if just the facts as presented at court....and the result....were printed.

Not applicable if the article on a forum was reporting an article in a mag....

I understand the company position. Just thought some facts were needed here

Cheers.........