Vendors feedback

[Michael Oritt]

Basil--

I know it's your forum and that you're the one who "gets the bill" if some vendor takes issue with a less-than-wonderful post, but if members cannot throw brickbats then perhaps they should not throw bouquets either.

 

[zblu]

I concur with you Michael, after all, without us as the consumers the market wouldnt be there!, so why should we as the end of the food chain put up with inferior produce!, there are almost enough people in here to set up a ltd company!

 

[MotorHead67]

There's nothing wrong with keeping the site civil. It's easy to trash a lousy supplier offline and still get the point across.

 

[zblu]

Hi Motorhead67,
I'm not advocating that, (trashing suppliers online) what i am pointing out is that those with inferior product will fall by the wayside by word of mouth

 

[Editor_Reid]

Speaking as a long-time editor of a national car club magazine, I can tell you that I receive VERY few complaints about vendors (advertisers). And that's too bad because if I received multiple complaints I would contact the vendor/advertiser to ask for resolution or at least response. I think that it would gve them the hint that (a) their business practices (or inferior product, or whatever) was becoming widely known, and (b) they might lose the ability to advertise. If they are smart business people, smart at all, this would set off alarm bells and they would respond.

I can tell you that a couple of years ago I intervened with a car seller (a business) who had sold a Healey that the buyer found to need some repairs to the tune of several thousand dollars, and at my suggestion the seller refunded the cost of the repairs to the buyer. In fact this was dscussed here in the British Car Forum.

The seller's reputation went way up, and the buyer was satified (if still a little unhappy about the hassle, at least he wasn't out any money for repairs that he didn't know were needed when he bought the car).

The clubs can be a very good way to leverage our collective experiences. That said, don't run to car club magazine editors wuth every little complaint! ALWAYS try to work it out directly with the vendor as your first course of action.

 

[shorn]

I think most of us realize that many of the after market parts for are LBCs are not of the best quality. Many are made in China as cheaply as possible. However, when one pays $145 for a new bumper from Moss, VB, or other sources when the cost to rechrome your original might be $350, we shouldn't expect too much.
That said, I have purchased numerous items for my BJ8 from Moss and other sources. If I had any problems with any of the Moss items, they refunded the price immediately. Can't ask for much better than that.

 

[Basil]

[ QUOTE ]
Basil--

I know it's your forum and that you're the one who "gets the bill" if some vendor takes issue with a less-than-wonderful post, but if members cannot throw brickbats then perhaps they should not throw bouquets either.

[/ QUOTE ]

1). One of the rules people agree to when they register is that they will not engage in vendor bashing. If a member has an issue with one of our advertisers, certainly please feel free to email or PM me about it. If I got enough complaints about a particular vendor I would not continue their advertising here. (So far I've not had any complaints about any of our vendors)

2). I understand that sometimes people are going to have a bad experience with some vendor (not necessarily one who advertises here). And if that happens, all I am asking is not not to post "brickbats" publicly because I have been threatened with a lawsuit once before and I can tell you it is disconcerting. You hopefully understand that I have NO way to assess whether a complaint about some business made in public on this forum is legit, or whether the complainer is just being unreasonable and unfairly bashing a vendor. However, if a member wants to PM someone or email them offline about some vendor, that's fine.

3) The difference between "brickbats" and "bouquets" is, there's not much of a chance for a lawsuit for posting good information.

The bottom line for me is, if the forum (me) gets sued, even if the negative post is 100 percent accurate, I would have to shut the forum down while I mounted a defense, which I could ill aford anyway. IF I was a Limited Liability Corp, I might not be as concerned, but I'm not.

All that being said, while I appreciate your sentiments, I don't generally see a lot of vendor bashing anyway so its probably not a major issue here. But I did recently have a vendor email me who was VERY upset about things posted about his company on this fourm (the post was a year old and some client of his brought the post to his attention). The implication of the post was that his was not a legitimate business. Well, I checked and he was most definitely legitimate and some of what was said in the post - well meaning though it may have been - was factually inaccutate.

Basil

 

[Keoke]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi Motorhead67,
I'm not advocating that, (trashing suppliers online) what i am pointing out is that those with inferior product will fall by the wayside by word of mouth

[/ QUOTE ]

Only if the mouth is exercised directly with the supplier,ZBLU---Keoke-- /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/hammer.gif

 

[Henri]

Wow...this is a real interesting topic...and one that I think is worth talking about...first I basically agree with Basil...yet I also disagree...I was helped because of this forum...without it...I do not think that I would have had any satisfaction...why...because the potential for bad publicity forced the supplier to resolve my problem...I NEEDED the forum's help...

Surely there must be away that this forum can be a voice for complaints while avoiding any liability for the actions or comments made by it's member? As a magazine publisher myself...I print a disclaimer in each issue that the opionions expressed are in no way my responsibility or views of my magazine...and are expressions of free speech by my contributors...this is generally something that most publications do...especially where opinions are contributed by outside sources...

I've seen television stations do "consumer assist" bits off and on...chasing down bad vendors forcing them to fix problems...for those that cannot get satisfaction otherwise...

Here is where I agree with Basil...this is his house...and he has his rules and we have to honor them...I'd only wish that there was someway that we could complain and use our combined voice to get a bad vendor to fix our problem... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cowboy.gif

What about liability insurance? Cost paid by the membership? Members signing off on releasing this site from liability and accepting full responsibility for their statements? Food for thought?

 

[Bruce Bowker]

I have to agree with ALL that Basil says for many reasons. Being in a business where bashing takes place, little is done or even allowed to have the person being bashed to respond. In many cases the basher enjoys bashing as many of us know from other internet forums. And when it is done with some anonymity it is even worse.

I back Basil 100% on this.

Bruce

 

[Bugeye58]

As do I.
A public forum isn't the proper place to air a grievance.
Sniping has no more place here than does spam.
Jeff

 

[Michael Oritt]

I'll stir the pot a little:

Several times, incuding quite recently, we've discussed oil filters. Links to the so-called "Oil Filter Study" can be found in the archives which criticizes quite severely the quality of many popular filters, esp. Fram, and also recommends some others, notably WIX/Napa. Members have enlarged on the study, pointing out to those with questions to look at the weight of the Fram baseplate versus others, etc. I've cut up Frams and K&N's and the latter definitely look better--of course I'm no scientist, though I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night....

My point is that if one member posts positive feedback about a product or service (BCF vendor or not) and another has had a negative experience with that same item, person, etc. I think the relevance of the list is increased were we able to know about the negative as well as the positive.

I know that this list is not moderated, though it is occasionally edited, and while good taste and common sense should dictate what we say that may be asking too much. In any case I am NOT advocating for bashing--merely for the sharing of information.

 

[Randy Harris]

I have managed quite effectively to communicate my displeasure with a couple of different vendors here without exposing Basil to defamation or liability actions. It's really quite simple. Tell your story here, in detail if you wish. Leave out the name or location of the vendor and announce that you will provide both to anyone that sends you a personal email request to do so. End of liability and the story gets told. Well, seems simple to me.
Randy '66 BJ8, '68 E-Type OTS

 

[JamesWilson]

I agree with you: to ask, as has been recently done about a particular vendor, and allow only positive replies will obviously skew the impression that the BCF presents of that vendor. It would be sytematically biased. Some level of dissent must be allowed simply to maintain a fair balance, even if its only to allow people to say they don't agree with the positive assessments. An indirect route?

I certainly wouldn't consider a dissent to be vendor bashing, or even criticism as usually defined.

If "X" people respond positively and twice that number dissent it seems clear what the public generally thinks.

Criticism can have many sources.

Its one thing to present an objective assessment of a product or service, as with the oil filters describing their physical characteristics. In this case no particular retailer is the target so the conflict is less personal.

If I think a particular part supplied is incorrect I should be able to substantiate that criticism noting its differences or deficiencies- e.g. thinner metal than original, incorrect shape, etc. A comparative analysis of different products or of a replacement against an original is, IMHO, an entirely fair and justifiable commentary. For example, not too long ago a discussion considered louvered bonnetts and the characteristics of the louvers. Its an issue important for concours entrants, and one of less interest to the rest of us. No names were mentioned, of course, but as noted earlier more private communications might have extracted that information from the participants. In these cases the dispute may involve specific issues, but be of broader interest in that many others may buy that part.

In both these types of cases I think a clear case of public interest can be made, in that the dispute is not limited to those directly involved.

Where the situation becomes less clear is where opinion is the only basis for the criticism and no objective standard can be applied. How much rust is "light rust"? What's a 90% retored car, anyway? And how long is too long for a restoration?

In these cases it would be useful to balance the positive views of some responses with others, and seem where the weight of opinion falls between the positives and the dissenters.

 

[Bruce Bowker]

As long as the vendor is informed and has the right and ability to reply.

 

[JamesWilson]

[ QUOTE ]
As long as the vendor is informed and has the right and ability to reply.

[/ QUOTE ]

So long as "Buyer Beware" rules then fair comment and discussion of vendor performance is essential, otherwise the bad ones will continue to prosper. A situation that the conscientious vendors should deplore.

And the vendors themselves sometimes have little interest in seeing "fairness".

I bought a DVD from Amazon that seemingly had a lot of Healey-related material- a 100-4 was shown on the cover and it mentioned both a 3000 Mk3 and Bugeye in its list of cars in it.

In fact the 100-4 was not on it at all, and of the 55 minutes of program only 2 1/2 comprised Healey coverage. I returned it to Amazon complaining that it had been materially misrepresented, and recieved a full refund. Very good.

BUT, I then posted a review of the product in which I warned of the misleading impression given by the cover and promotional material. That review never appeared. The facts were plainly stated. There was absolutely no opinion offered as to the quality of the video or commentary made.

The vendor may thus still be selling copies to people mislead as I was by what they think is being sold. I don't really understand it, for I've seen other cases where Amazon did post critical reviews.

Yes, I was fairly treated AFTER I bought it, but preventing the problem in the FIRST place saves everyone, even the vendor, the aggravation and costs of rectifying the situation.

And fair product reviews can do that.

 

[Basil]

If I haven't learned anything else from my five years of running this forum, I have learned that you can't please everyone and it's generally an exercise in futility to try.

There has been a lot of interesting discussion here about a rule that I've had at BFC since the day I opened the forum. It seems that some folks agree with my stance and some have a different view. That’s fine, and I respect all opinions, but in the end this is a private forum which is paid for almost totally out of my pocket (and I have literally spent thousands to not only keep BCF online, but to continually improve, upgrade, and add new features). It is a place where anyone who has a love of British cars can exchange technical information and just generally shoot the breeze. But the issue of “vendor bashing” is something that has always been part of the new user agreement that every members agrees to (assuming they take the time to read what they are agreeing too, which I realize may be wishful thinking):

[ QUOTE ]

4. No vendor bashing! If you have a problem with a vendor, take it up with the vendor. Don't use this forum for registering complaints about any vendor or business.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please understand, I don't want to completely stifle discussions that may be important to others here, but I do want to avoid having some business unfairly slandered and end up having to fight a lawsuit (Amazon can afford a battery of lawyers, I can not); so let me clarify what I mean by vendor bashing. First, discussing the merits or lack therefore, on a technical level, of some product (like a filter for example), is not something I would usually consider vendor bashing and in fact a lot of those kinds of discussions go on here. If, in the course of a discussion of parts or services, you share that you had a less than great experience with a particular vendor that is usually ok too as long as you stick to the specifics of your experience. Anything beyond that, please take it to PM or email. Making blanket negative statements, like “those guys are dishonest and a bunch of crooks,” or “those guys are a bunch of scam artists,” are NOT acceptable. If you feel that a business has engaged in dishonest or illegal tactics, your first course of action should be to try and resolve it with them and, failing that, pursue your own lawsuit if you think it’s warranted or call the state’s attorney general. If you make a statement that implicates a business in dishonest or illegal activity, I have no way to assess the situation since I am not a lawyer or a judge. Even if you are convinced that such a statement is true, it is the kind of unsubstantiated generality that could result in a lawsuit (and the end of BCF).

The tricky part is deciding what legitimate discussion is and what is potentially libelous. I know that a lot of that kind of “sharing” goes on here, and I don’t think I could be accused of being too heavy handed in moderating this place. But, the bottom line is, exercise a little common sense and discretion when discussing vendors, and avoid making blanket statements that could be slanderous, even if you are convinced they are true. If you are not sure, you can always ask me before posting. In the end though, if I am not comfortable with the direction a thread is taking, and I delete it, I ask that you respect that decision.

As I said in my first reply, I have been threatened with a lawsuit once before and whether it would have been a legitimate lawsuit or not, BCF would have closed its doors forever. That kind of stuff detracts from the fun of running this place, and when it ceases being fun, then it ceases being.

As Forrest Gump would say: “and that’s all I have to say about that.”


Basil

 

[Michael Oritt]

I'm in accordance with Basil's remarks, esp. in light of the very reasonable proposition that Randy put forth as regards communicating detailed info offlist to any interested parties.

Thanks all for a good discussion--I know that everyone wants to keep this list as a future asset and maximize its value.