Online reviews that are not defamatory - can a persons be sued

Blackbanana

Registered User
Messages
17
We posted a review on an engineering company's website stating that our building project did not comply with building regulations, was structurally unsound, was unsafe, and that the certification given was actually false, certs given for new foundations and radon barrier when there was nonce, certs to say it complied with building regulations when it didn't from a clearly visible perspective. Stating that we had to pay out 80k in remedial work, which is true. Stating that the engineering company were engaged for full project management and design, which was true, and had engaged the builder. Stating that the principal engineer was struck off by his professional body for a year, for professional misconduct - following our complaint - though he is appealing that. Now engineering company are threatening legal proceedings re our post if we do not take it down - how is our post defamatory, given that there are four reports to back it up from other professionals. Is it not possible to leave an honest, factual, true, bad review, or are we being bullied?
 
We posted a review on an engineering company's website stating that our building project did not comply with building regulations, was structurally unsound, was unsafe, and that the certification given was actually false, certs given for new foundations and radon barrier when there was nonce, certs to say it complied with building regulations when it didn't from a clearly visible perspective. Stating that we had to pay out 80k in remedial work, which is true. Stating that the engineering company were engaged for full project management and design, which was true, and had engaged the builder. Stating that the principal engineer was struck off by his professional body for a year, for professional misconduct - following our complaint - though he is appealing that. Now engineering company are threatening legal proceedings re our post if we do not take it down - how is our post defamatory, given that there are four reports to back it up from other professionals. Is it not possible to leave an honest, factual, true, bad review, or are we being bullied?

One of you is in the right and one isn't. Interesting that they're giving you a chance to take it down, because if you're wrong they should sue you. Like everything that someone writes or says about another, you better be able to fully back it up, or else it could cost. Like a carpenter, measure twice, cut once, so to speak.
 
Hi Blackbanana,

The answer to your question is yes!

An alternate question to ponder is whether one can be successfully sued?

Think about the difference.
 
Thanks for the replies. Yes, we can fully back it up. Two expert witnesses and four reports - the expert witnesses are willing to testify in Court. The case is currently in the High Court. We can back absolutely everything up.
 
Thanks for the replies. Yes, we can fully back it up. Two expert witnesses and four reports - the expert witnesses are willing to testify in Court. The case is currently in the High Court. We can back absolutely everything up.

Just out of curiousity, a couple of questions:

- Do they not have control over their Web site and hence able to take it down themselves?
- What's your motivation for posting the review?

My own observation is that there's usually two sides to every story, even if you are in the right. Why, for example, are they bothering to appeal the strike-off unless they think it has a chance of success?
 
Newtothis - I don't know what you mean by strike-off? Do you mean professional body. They have tried everything for professional body not to hear the case and to prevent the Disciplinary Body going ahead. The engineer was suspended for one year for serious professional misconduct. Well it's a google review. i agree re two sides to every story. There was a fraudulent and endangerment element to the case, and I understand the Gardai may be interviewing the engineer at some stage.
 
how is our post defamatory, given that there are four reports to back it up from other professionals

Given the nature of these things I would expect that the other side will try to produce reports that disagree with your four reports. You need to be sure your reports are water tight.
 
Two things I don't understand.

If it's their website, they can remove your post, they don't need to ask you.

If you're bringing a case against the company why would you show them your hand in advance?
 
Just a few thoughts.

Generally, if a statement is defamatory in character and it is published there is a virtual presumption that the defendant will be liable.
Put another way, if the plaintiff can establish that the words complained of are of a defamatory nature the defendant will then bear the burden of establishing the various defences available in order to escape liability.

Truth is one of the specific defences available. Section 16 of the Defamation Act 2009 provides that it is a good defence if the defendant can prove that the statement complained of is true in all material respects.

A defamatory statement is defined as one that tends to injure a person’s reputation in the eyes of reasonable members of society. This is set out in the Defamation Act 2009.

A curiosity occurs here. The statement in issue has to be published to render the defendant open to action. Publication does not take place if the statement in question is only published to the party about whom it has been made. There are variations on this but I am trying to keep it simple ! If the statement was communicated to the engineering company only there is a doubt that publication has happened. What amuses me is that the engineering company seem to be the ones who published the statement on their website ? Maybe this explains why they want it taken down as distinct from going legal nuclear ?

I take the general view that before you publish you need to have the evidence in place to defend a statement. You need to be confident that the available evidence will withstand the scrutiny of a court. Even if you are satisfied on this point litigation still carries risks which is why I always adopt a highly cautious approach about publication of statements.

In conclusion, this has the potential to get complex and nasty. I recommend that you now consult with your solicitor to formulate a professionally guided response at this early stage.

FYI link to defamation Act 2009 - http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2009/act/31/enacted/en/print
 
I recommend that you now consult with your solicitor to formulate a professionally guided response at this early stage.

Is this not jumping the gun,
Why should they be put to the expense of engaging a solicitor at this stage.

If this was actionable, they would be doing more than requesting they remove the post, they would have a solicitors letter in their hand by now.

They posted their experience on the company's website, if you fall short of the mark, you have to accept the bad reviews, or similar sites would place warning of good reviews only accepted.

If I sell a vehicle for €50k, the owner find out it has major mechanical defects, and cost me €10k to put it right, the SiMi agree with a report stating these flaws, am I not to expect a poor review on my web site?
 
Why should they be put to the expense of engaging a solicitor at this stage.

Looks like the case is currently in the High Court, so it's safe to assume they are already working with a solicitor. Given that's the case, the solicitor is best positioned to advise on this matter. Putting up, or now taking down a public review could affect your case.

If I sell a vehicle for €50k, the owner find out it has major mechanical defects, and cost me €10k to put it right, the SiMi agree with a report stating these flaws, am I not to expect a poor review on my web site?

I'd imagine that depends on the content of the review. If they stated you knowingly sold them a dud or engaged in shady practices, then you could easily claim defamation unless they were somehow able to prove that you were aware of any faults and deliberately hid them from the purchaser.
 
Is this not jumping the gun,
Why should they be put to the expense of engaging a solicitor at this stage.

If this was actionable, they would be doing more than requesting they remove the post, they would have a solicitors letter in their hand by now.

They posted their experience on the company's website, if you fall short of the mark, you have to accept the bad reviews, or similar sites would place warning of good reviews only accepted.

If I sell a vehicle for €50k, the owner find out it has major mechanical defects, and cost me €10k to put it right, the SiMi agree with a report stating these flaws, am I not to expect a poor review on my web site?

I did not realise that this matter was at an advanced stage as per Leo's post - I was posting on the assumption that this was a new matter arising.

The reason behind my suggestion was that my experience of defamation actions is that they quickly fizzle out to nothing after the initial threat or they go nuclear. If you handle the matter properly at the outset you can save yourself a lot of legal grief.

In relation to your car sale example you are quite right. The purchaser would have a good answer to any defamation action if the relevant evidence actually stands up the adverse commentary.
 
Back
Top