Public Citizen Suing On Behalf Of Customers Whose Credit Was Ruined By KlearGear's $3,500 'Bad Review' Fee
from the how's-that-plan-to-eliminate-negative-reviews-working-out-now? dept
KlearGear's decision to charge a customer $3,500 for writing a negative review has finally paid off for the company. Whoever was in charge of inserting a non-disparagement clause into the site's Terms of Sale back in June of 2012 set in motion the worst of all possible scenarios.
KlearGear's reputation is now thoroughly destroyed. Its social media presence has been shuttered. The search results for KlearGear are unflattering, to say the least. The BBB has yanked Kleargear's rating and opened an investigation into its tactics. Its supposed Truste validation is nothing more than a "sticker" applied to the site without the approval of the validation company. As Ken White at Popehat puts it, KlearGear is reaping the whirlwind.
The company was doing $40+ million in sales per year, if this Inc. profile is to be believed. Without reservation, I can say sales have dropped off appreciably in the wake of its stupidity being exposed.
KlearGear has become even more uncommunicative than it was back in 2010, when it decided to wreck a former customer's credit in return for her negative review. Even back then, even before the non-disparagement clause, it was in the wrong. Jen Palmer's (the customer who wrote the review) order never showed up and as she states, it was "impossible" to get ahold of a human being to get this fixed.
The costs of this self-made whirlwind continue to mount. Public Citizen is now suing KlearGear on the Palmers' behalf, seeking monetary damages for the havoc wreaked on the former customers' credit by the company's moronic attempt to extract $3,500 from its detractors.
Public Citizen is representing Jen and John Palmer in seeking redress from KlearGear. Today, we sent this demand letter seeking three actions from KlearGear: first, clearing up John's credit; second, paying $75,000 in compensation for the Palmers' ordeal, which has lasted more than a year; and third, agreeing to stop using this non-disparagement clause to extort money from their customers.As Public Citizen's blog post points out, efforts to shut down negative reviews are far from rare, even though nearly every incident only garners these censorious entities more negative press.
KlearGear's conduct is part of a troubling trend of businesses trying to deter negative reviews by muzzling their customers. Another example is Public Citizen's case against a New York dentist who tried to make her patients agree, as a condition of treatment, that they would not criticize her. And TechDirt has reported about the use of such a clause in vacation rental agreements.While a settlement would probably be preferable, it would be interesting to see this run through a trial. For one thing, it would uncover who actually runs KlearGear, something that has been carefully obscured.
Kleargear identifies itself as a division of both Chenal Brands Inc., and Havaco Direct Inc., both business entities based in San Antonio, Tex. The website itself is registered through Domains By Proxy, a GoDaddy.com site that sells private domain hosting and administrative services.Furthermore, it would possibly shed some light on its decision to drop this catastrophic non-disparagement clause into its Terms of Sale back in 2012. That question certainly deserves an answer, considering all possible outcomes of enforcing the clause are completely negative.
Other companies, who are considering ways to curtail negative reviews, would do well to view this as a cautionary tale. If you're fielding a lot of negative complaints, the issue is very likely with your own company, not the customers airing their grievances on the internet. Fix those problems and save your company. Any attempts to "fix" the complaints will only hurt you more.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: credit scores, non-disparagement, reviews
Companies: kleargear
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Streisand Effect
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Is This Criminal Fraud?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Is This Criminal Fraud?
If you leave it to them, you're going to be left waiting a long while.
They appear to have better things to do.
Priorities, priorities�
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Is This Criminal Fraud?
Because they they allege that they have been harmed and deserve financial compensation for that harm?
Perhaps there should ALSO be a criminal case, but that doesn't preclude the civil case.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Is This Criminal Fraud?
And under federal law you can instruct collection agencies to stop calling you and you can sue them if they don't.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Is it actually a suit?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
As to whom KlearGear's real owners are...
...my first guess would be John Steele and Paul Hansmeier.
There's just a perfect kind of symmetry to that answer.
.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Its Fraud all right
What is REALLY offensive is having 6 censors on Wikipedia zapping every fact for every 1 contributor attempting to put them up. (errr zero contributors)
http://neer-do-well-hall-of-infamey.blogspot.ca/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
KlearGear doing fine ...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: KlearGear doing fine ...
...Or an upfront lying excuse for poor customer service and deliberate under-staffing, assuming there actually -is- a staff somewhere.
.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Negative complaints
[Nicholson]
Is there another kind?
[/Nicholson]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Where is the clause?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Where is the clause?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why KlearGear Is Being Driven Out of Business
Every manufacturer will have a direct connection with Amazon, and will ask hard questions of anyone who wants a dealership franchise. Specifically, tell us about your walk-in traffic, and why you aren't going to be cannibalizing our 7-11 business, or our Walgreen's business, or our Kroger's business, or our Target business, or our Amazon business, and further be prepared to enter into a performance bond that in the event of your going out of business, unsold inventory will not be sold to a liquidator, or anything like that.
There are a few ways a small mail order/internet vendor can remain viable. He can acquire his inventory "on the scrounge," by visiting garage sales, etc. Consumer protection laws tend to take a stern view of any attempt to impose a contract by stealth on the ultimate consumer, and if something is really well and truly used, the owner is commonly free to sell it for two cents to whoever will haul it away. This method works better for books and other media than it does for most other products. Alternatively, a small mail order/internet vendor can actually manufacture something, and sell it. Outside of the special case of books and other media, Amazon is not, as yet, capable of manufacturing small quantities of this, that, and the other thing. The catch is that a small vendor with an essentially incoherent inventory is not likely to have the equipment and expertise to make anything either.
The kind of "incidents" which KlearGear has been involved in are probably a byproduct of the "coffin corner."
Looking over KlearGear's website, their merchandise seems irretrievably trashy. They invite you to decorate your office cubicle with items saying that you are still five years old. Years ago, when I was a GTF, and had an on-campus office in consequence, I put up a print of _The Man with the Golden Helmet_ (formerly attributed to Rembrandt) on the door, and a print of Vermeer's _Girl with a Pearl Earring_ on the inside wall. I had bought both prints at a sale in the student union building. Nowadays we live in less spacious times, and someone with a modest salary of five or ten thousand dollars doesn't rate an office. The appropriate means to decorate a cube or a locker would be to download the pictures from the internet, and print them off on ordinary paper using an ink-jet printer.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rembrandt_(circle)_-_The_Man_with_the_Golden_Helmet_-_Goog le_Art_Project.jpg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girl_with_a_Pearl_Earring
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Glad
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Fine
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Fine
It's a fee; the word "fine" doesn't appear in the story.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
KlearGear SUCKS!!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: KlearGear SUCKS!!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Klear Gear
[ link to this | view in chronology ]