Zwick Window Shade Co., a Chicago business, has a novel approach to business. When a husband and wife were not happy with their service and wrote a slightly negative review on Yelp, the company sued the couple for libel. It is one of a growing number of such cases where businesses seek to punish those who express their views about service.
The couple complained that she and her husband never received a set of blinds ordered from Zwick:
“Still waiting on blinds ordered nearly 4 months ago that were supposed to take 3 to 6 weeks.” The comments were balanced overall with the couple writing that “My husband and I like to support small, family-run businesses when doing home improvement projects.” What is particularly remarkable about this case is that they gave the business a two-star review that said that Zwick’s service was excellent, but the delay in receiving the product was frustrating. It was over four months after the Oct. 16, 2013 purchase that Zwick delivered and installed the blinds.
The company actually went to court to claim that, since the blinds were eventually delivered, the Yelp review is making “misrepresentations about the alleged non-delivery of the blinds” and is essentially false. The company hired lawyers to threaten the couple that “In the event that your [Yelp] statement is not removed within five days from the date of this letter, my client intends to pursue all remedies available to him at law and equity . . . In addition, you must not publicly publish this event in the future.” They later sued for no less than $50,000 in damages and that the review be taken down.
These lawsuits are in my view inherently abusive and thuggish. This was clearly an opinion by customers based on the delay by the company. The fact that this company would threaten dissatisfied customers is a far more worrisome fact than the four-month delay. The company clearly has a different view of what constitutes blind[s] justice.
Source: CBS
Here is a link to the yelp article:
http://www.yelp.com/biz/zwick-window-shade-co-chicago
As can be expected, the business’s rating is now at one and a half stars with nearly all comments one star nastygrams from those prompted by the lawsuit to flame them.
I see a summary judgment against the company if it goes that far.
The only problem I have with online comments for businesses is that it is easy for someone to fake being a customer and harm your reputation (Amazon is rife with this), or lie about their experience for personal reasons.
But lawsuits aren’t the answer.
We have a friend who owns an historical hotel and restaurant with cocktail lounge in our area. She encourages and welcomes any complaints about her food, staff or any other aspect of her business and has an on line format on her own website for this.
Her rationale is that “If I don’t know there is a problem, how can I fix it?” She thanks any and all commenters profusely whether they are good reviews or bad reviews.
If a person is unhappy with your business and they don’t tell YOU, you can bet that they are telling their friends.
Along with, but not exclusively, government regulations and legal protection, consumer reports are necessary to insure that business lives up to its promises. It might seem sufficient to state that if a company does not perform it will not survive but that does not address the losses incurred by the consumers until a bad reputation takes place. I don’t recall any rights ever written down that allowed an enterprise open to the public to do other than they advertise/promise. This posting of the truth, if in fact it is the truth, should be protected by the law and the law should not be the instrument only affordable by the business. If the business loses then they should be liable for all reasonable damages, including the client’s legal costs. This is no different that a collision between two cars. Typically one is at fault and they pay.
They probably should have amended their review to include that the blinds were delivered. And to write about the letter they got.
Zwick is Zdick.
As DBQ said, online reviews are important and companies like Yelp are growing exponentially. I heard a person from Yelp interviewed on NPR a while back. They go to great lengths to monitor reviews and make sure they’re legit. A big problem is businesses that compete w/ each other writing negative reviews. Yelp spends a lotta time evaluating and deleting bad reviews. As this Yelp person said, their reputation is number 1. If people don’t trust their reviews, they go out of biz.
Go here and take a look. It has already back fired on them:
http://www.yelp.com/biz/zwick-window-shade-co-chicago?fsid=jCUIr76yMSjkSmY-Y9la9w
Give me a link to this Yelp review and I will cut them a new one….I am judgement proof.. screw em’
Seriously I want a way to post a review if you have it…
As a person who does extensive buying on the internet, I really rely on the on-line product reviews and take them seriously. Sometimes you can tell that the reviewer is just a crank or has some bone to pick with the product or the person manufacturing the product. But, mostly the reviewers are as accurate as they can be. I have left reviews of products myself.
If people are afraid to leave reviews or get angry with the actions of companies such as this one, the review section would be worthless. A business owner should be grateful for the negative reviews since it allows him/her to be able to fix problems with their company. A problem that festers and is not known about will not go away and will eventually bring your business down. Knowledge of the bad things is good.
Free speech allows us to say nice things and not so nice things. Sometimes the truth hurts.
I hope the couple has the funds to fight them in court, because the blinds company will lose. They DID take 4 months to deliver the blinds, and at the time of the writing, the customers WERE still waiting.
“You do not libel garbage when you say it stinks!”
Yelp discourages retaliating against customers who post negative reviews, because such an act has a far worse effect on their reputation than the actual review. Who is going to use their service now?
I wonder if they can now write a new review saying they are being threatened by the company for their previous bad review. Actually the review sounded even handed to me. Truth is the defense to libel.
As Shulte mentions above, why no mention of anti-SLAPP laws in this article? Does Illinois have such legislation?
You do not defame if you tell the truth. The Zwick President is an ugly duckling. Well the duckling aspect may be false. But, he is ugly. Ugly has various connotations. You can be ugly for more than physical appearance. Your actions can be ugly. Zwick has just pooped on itself and does not know it yet. Put the word out. Zwick, Zwick, bo bick, banana fanna fo fick, fee fi mo Mick. A little trick with Zwick. The name game will not help them. Zwick was the name of a defendant at Nuremberg.
By filing suit against a customer who simply stated an opinion, IMO, this company just sealed the deal and made it VERY clear — that any savvy consumer should steer clear of doing business with this company and look elsewhere…..period.
Truth is a complete defense to defamation.
The company was within its rights to do so, but it seems like a useless endeavor unless it can prove the statements untruthful.
Went on Facebook and gave them a one star review.
Found that there were 8 others who had done the same.
This could be an expensive move for Zwick.
So much for using the internet to exchange information. Corporations don’t want criticism they want your money. They don’t want to provide services they just want your money.
Considering the earlier post on GLOBAL LOGISTIS in UAE getting an American employee arrest for a negative posting on Facebook, I guess this consumers should count themselves lucky that corporations don’t yet have the right to put you in jail for making a complaint but just wait.
Consumer should beware of a new form of contract that is now being used by many corporations that contains a gag order and liquidated damages clause. When are legislatures and judges going to do something about this? Never and with TTP on its way consumers will be literally at the mercy of corporations.
Well, I certainly won’t be giving Zwick Window Shade Co. any business after reading this article. Makes me wonder if their lawyers will be sending Professor Turley a letter next. That would make a very interesting case. Can we criticize specific businesses on blogs without the expectation of a lawsuit?
I am not sure if this qualifies for an anti-SLAPP action.
Is there any way for this couple to file counter suit against Zwick to at least recoup their legal fees? This seems obviously abusive and you would think that the law would be on their side with this.