Kwik fit exempt from name & shame?
Discussion
Has PH abandoned its name & shame policy? Or are Kwik Fit fair game?
2 KF bashing threads running at the moment, another last week was allowed to go on, yet Racing Pete had closed one the week before.
I have no allegiance to KF - I could tell stories that make those ones seem tame - but I can't see how this is consistent.
Can my mate post his story of the lying TVR specialist yet? Or the other one who is so incompetent that I wouldn't let him adjust the chain on a bicycle?
Policy should apply to everybody, or nobody.
2 KF bashing threads running at the moment, another last week was allowed to go on, yet Racing Pete had closed one the week before.
I have no allegiance to KF - I could tell stories that make those ones seem tame - but I can't see how this is consistent.
Can my mate post his story of the lying TVR specialist yet? Or the other one who is so incompetent that I wouldn't let him adjust the chain on a bicycle?
Policy should apply to everybody, or nobody.
This was explained recently by a mod. The summary was that the bigger the company (Tesco, Kwik Fit, BT, Royal Mail etc) the less likely they are to bring charges over something posted, so they don't bother policing it.
But I agree, if you're going to have any name and shame, it should apply to everyone.
But I agree, if you're going to have any name and shame, it should apply to everyone.
Raify said:
This was explained recently by a mod. The summary was that the bigger the company (Tesco, Kwik Fit, BT, Royal Mail etc) the less likely they are to bring charges over something posted, so they don't bother policing it.
But I agree, if you're going to have any name and shame, it should apply to everyone.
The naming and shaming policy applies to all, but you are correct that we need to tread more carefully around smaller companies as these are the ones more likely to be affected by negative comments on PH and also the ones most likely to sue.But I agree, if you're going to have any name and shame, it should apply to everyone.
I'll admit that I haven't looked at the kwik-fit thread recently, but it has not been reported moderators and last time I looked it contained a mix of comments (some bad, a couple of good ones) about the service and value they provide, but no allegations of malpractice or anything else likely to be seen as libellous.
If there is something in the thread that you feel we need to look at then just hit the report button and the mods will look into it straight away.
Defcon5 said:
Is there really a risk of being sued though? On another forum someone was rather critical of Thorney, and they sent them an email threatening this and that and they just ignored it
It happens to us (and other large sites) on a regular basis and, regardless of the outcome, libel cases are extremely expensive to defend against.Raify said:
How do some other forums seem to ignore this risk? I'm on a few other forums with no name and shame at all.
Just curious, I've got no real problem with having a policy or not.
Little forums often don't realise the risk, and an N&S on a smaller forum is less likely to be spotted anyway. There might also be some that are big enough, or have in house lawyers, which allows them to stomach the costs.Just curious, I've got no real problem with having a policy or not.
Due to a legal quirk, unmoderated forums are also less at risk as they only have to act when someone complains, where as the fact that we have moderators means we can be expected to see it and act without someone having to complain.
At the end of the day, we have had a number of legal cases in the past couple of years which have cost us a significant sum of money and we would like to avoid that rising in future.
Mr Will's points are interesting as I've had to tread carefully recently with some major moaning about a main stealer and the service I've had of late.
However, how on earth do sites like Money Saving Expert get away with it? The forums there seem to be full of people bashing companies large and small...
However, how on earth do sites like Money Saving Expert get away with it? The forums there seem to be full of people bashing companies large and small...
theboyfold said:
However, how on earth do sites like Money Saving Expert get away with it? The forums there seem to be full of people bashing companies large and small...
I don't know, and can honesty say I haven't investigated.Not everything is libellous, something which is provably factual is safe (although unfortunately we cannot just take your word for something being true), as is something which is clearly stated as opinion.
It is possible that their moderators have a very clear brief of what can stay and what must be removed, or alternatively (as mentioned above) they are possibly have an in-house legal team and stomach the costs or are running unmoderated until someone complains. But that is all just speculation, I would be interested to hear how they do it.
tvrgit said:
I reported a KF thread last weekend. Nothing happened, no action, no reply, nothing.
There are now another 2 threads going, again no action.
Still can't see why the policy doesn't apply to everyone, or no-one. A policy isn't a policy if it's applied selectively.
At the time you reported it, there was no libellous content in it. I have not returned since then to check. Report what you think is libellous and we will look at it and if we agree we will remove it.There are now another 2 threads going, again no action.
Still can't see why the policy doesn't apply to everyone, or no-one. A policy isn't a policy if it's applied selectively.
The policy is that you are not allowed to post potentially libellous content, where it is seen it will be removed and if you make repeated attempts to post it then further action may be taken. It is applied to all, but we cannot and do not read every post on the site.
Mr Will said:
tvrgit said:
I reported a KF thread last weekend. Nothing happened, no action, no reply, nothing.
There are now another 2 threads going, again no action.
Still can't see why the policy doesn't apply to everyone, or no-one. A policy isn't a policy if it's applied selectively.
At the time you reported it, there was no libellous content in it... There are now another 2 threads going, again no action.
Still can't see why the policy doesn't apply to everyone, or no-one. A policy isn't a policy if it's applied selectively.
It is applied to all, but we cannot and do not read every post on the site.
Comments on thread said:
pointed out problems which didn't exist
Rip off merchants, do Trading Standard have a file on them?, does anyone know of a successful prosecution against these guys
(Is it Kwik Fit 'cos they fit you up kwik???)
No change in KF using scare tactics. Goes to show that it must be a good way to 'get' business for them to continue using it.
Kwik fit's bread and butter seem to be people who know very little/nothing about cars.
The type of people that will blindly pay an extortionate bill, as they dont know any better.
How they sleep at night I don't know and I suspect a large percentage of any work undertaken there is not needed.
Nothing libellous in there? Really? I'd beg to differ. Plenty of accusations of lying and deceit in there, and that was only the first few hours.Rip off merchants, do Trading Standard have a file on them?, does anyone know of a successful prosecution against these guys
(Is it Kwik Fit 'cos they fit you up kwik???)
No change in KF using scare tactics. Goes to show that it must be a good way to 'get' business for them to continue using it.
Kwik fit's bread and butter seem to be people who know very little/nothing about cars.
The type of people that will blindly pay an extortionate bill, as they dont know any better.
How they sleep at night I don't know and I suspect a large percentage of any work undertaken there is not needed.
I am now going to report my own post here, so that I can run the true, verifiable story of the lying deceitful TVR specialist past PH before posting it.
Edited by tvrgit on Saturday 8th May 07:28
The N&S policy applies to all, but the reality is that we're likely to be more tolerant of threads urging caution against very large firms simply because it is more tacitly accepted that such firms will experience such coverage in the national press, and are less likely to come after PistonHeads.
Smaller firms with businesses based more completely on the custom of PH members are more likely to cause us grief, and more likely to have a strong case for compensation in the event of legal action. It is far from an ideal situation and we'd dearly love not to have to remove threads completely, particularly when it is clear that the poster has a perfectly valid complaint. The reality is though that we have neither the time, resource nor inclination to fight every such case; we'd need a big legal fighting fund and the resource to verify every story.
It's far from perfect, but it is what it is and it isn't likely to change for the foreseeable future.
So, TVRGit, I'm afraid that you can't post the stuff that you reported.
Smaller firms with businesses based more completely on the custom of PH members are more likely to cause us grief, and more likely to have a strong case for compensation in the event of legal action. It is far from an ideal situation and we'd dearly love not to have to remove threads completely, particularly when it is clear that the poster has a perfectly valid complaint. The reality is though that we have neither the time, resource nor inclination to fight every such case; we'd need a big legal fighting fund and the resource to verify every story.
It's far from perfect, but it is what it is and it isn't likely to change for the foreseeable future.
So, TVRGit, I'm afraid that you can't post the stuff that you reported.
Edited by Stuart on Saturday 8th May 09:29
Stuart said:
The N&S policy applies to all, but the reality is that we're likely to be more tolerant of threads urging caution against very large firms simply because it is more tacitly accepted that such firms will experience such coverage in the national press, and are less likely to come after PistonHeads.
I'm sorry. Although I understand your thinking, and am aware that some entirely reputable businesses have been severely damaged by naming and shaming, not necessarily on here but generally, I still don't see how you can have a no naming and shaming POLICY and then add informally "except for big firms who might not bother so are fair game". A policy is a policy and should be applied "without fear or favour" across the board - no discretion, no exceptions, policy.The alternative is no policy, and everybody is fair game.
Half a policy is not the answer.
Stuart said:
It wasn't so much a subject for debate as a statement of the way things are. I note your misgivings, but this is how we want to do things.
Cheers,
Stuart
I realise it's not open for debate, didn't intend to start a fight. It just seems inconsistent, and if anything INCREASES the risk of being taken on by the big boys - I mean, it's difficult to argue that you weren't aware!Cheers,
Stuart
But at the end of the day, although it's not the policy I would adopt, it's not my site, and it's up to the owners.
tvrgit said:
Comments on thread said:
pointed out problems which didn't exist
Rip off merchants, do Trading Standard have a file on them?, does anyone know of a successful prosecution against these guys
(Is it Kwik Fit 'cos they fit you up kwik???)
No change in KF using scare tactics. Goes to show that it must be a good way to 'get' business for them to continue using it.
Kwik fit's bread and butter seem to be people who know very little/nothing about cars.
The type of people that will blindly pay an extortionate bill, as they dont know any better.
How they sleep at night I don't know and I suspect a large percentage of any work undertaken there is not needed.
Nothing libellous in there? Really? I'd beg to differ. Plenty of accusations of lying and deceit in there, and that was only the first few hours.Rip off merchants, do Trading Standard have a file on them?, does anyone know of a successful prosecution against these guys
(Is it Kwik Fit 'cos they fit you up kwik???)
No change in KF using scare tactics. Goes to show that it must be a good way to 'get' business for them to continue using it.
Kwik fit's bread and butter seem to be people who know very little/nothing about cars.
The type of people that will blindly pay an extortionate bill, as they dont know any better.
How they sleep at night I don't know and I suspect a large percentage of any work undertaken there is not needed.
Nothing in your list of comments is anything which the courts wouldn't simply regard as statements an ordinary reasonable man would take 'with a large pinch of salt'.
ETA: General comments are unlikely to attract legal attention. A post saying that a visit to Branch X of company Y resulted in a deliberate scam Z, may.
Edited by V8mate on Sunday 9th May 10:12
Gassing Station | Website Feedback | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff