Morris Minor Owners Club

In the limited time I have been a member of the club and been using this forum, I have been surprised by the reluctance to report suppliers offering poor customer service and or defective or inferior quality parts.

This seems to stem from the Club being afraid of being sued for defamation.

The reality is that the Club, and the individual posting the report have nothing to fear if the report is correct in both fact and substance.

Provided phrases such as "xxx supplier is rubbish avoid like the plague" are not used and just the facts are presented, any attempt to sue is doomed to fail.

The Defamation Act 2013 is printed online for all to see and perhaps the Club should consider its attitude towards what would undoubtedly be a useful resource for members.

Well said!

You are absolutely correct in substance, but you are ignoring the important factor of litigation risk. No commercial organisation ignores the possibility that courts will arrive at perverse judgments, and that serious money can have been spent on fees before then. Hence the often used phrase "settled out of court". The Club (which I must get round to actually joining...) couldn't risk having to defend even the most outrageous defamation claim as it has nothing to win and everything to lose.

In my working life in the dispute riddled construction sector I frequently have to advise clients that it isn't enough being right, you still have to be rich enough to afford to lose. Principles are very expensive things.

There has been a QC on the message board recently - perhaps he could comment ........

Mark

What is the club's liability if someone gives advice on the forum that leads to an accident, loss or injury?

Can incorrect "positive" comment about a supplier that leads to a loss by the person following that advice be a risk to the club?

Or is this covered somewhere in some T&C's? Or is this something for the H&S Police?

I can generally rely on common sense when I'm given advice, daresay many others can, good job we don't all worry about the possibility of doing something stupid. Eg, Put your head in the oven----answer---No.

Where appropriate I try to suggest 'what I would do' - it's then up to others to consider if they would do similar.

les wrote:I can generally rely on common sense when I'm given advice, daresay many others can, good job we don't all worry about the possibility of doing something stupid. Eg, Put your head in the oven----answer---No.

Ovens are pretty dull, just dark with a few burnt crumbs at the bottom - puzzled why people should
feel the need to put their head in one(?).

Mark Wilson wrote:You are absolutely correct in substance, but you are ignoring the important factor of litigation risk. No commercial organisation ignores the possibility that courts will arrive at perverse judgments, and that serious money can have been spent on fees before then. Hence the often used phrase "settled out of court". The Club (which I must get round to actually joining...) couldn't risk having to defend even the most outrageous defamation claim as it has nothing to win and everything to lose.

In my working life in the dispute riddled construction sector I frequently have to advise clients that it isn't enough being right, you still have to be rich enough to afford to lose. Principles are very expensive things.

There has been a QC on the message board recently - perhaps he could comment ........

Mark

If we all take that view then the mamby pamby politically correct softies have won.

I can't imagine any individual or corporate body being advised by lawyers to pursue a claim which does not have a reasonable chance of succeeding because other than actions brought in the small claims court the loser has to pay both sides costs.
The "say nothing, keep your head down, don't upset anyone" attitude that seems to become ever more commonplace is ruining this country.

blues2rock wrote: ......report suppliers offering poor customer service and or defective or inferior quality parts.

Why not instead recommend suppliers that provide good service and high quality parts.

As for asking for and giving advice, I like to think everyone(generally) using a car forum should be old enough to drive, therefore classed as an adult, have a fair degree of common sense and be able to 'pick the meat off the bones' in forum replies. You shouldn't need to tell people to wear eye protection etc. If you need to tell them the basics then they probably shouldn't be working on something that could potentially break and harm others....

The Series MM Register Technical Information carries the following disclaimer
Information in this pack is given in good faith and whilst every effort is made to check its accuracy anyone using said information does so at their own risk, and liability cannot be accepted for loss or damage incurred through use or misuse of aforementioned information.

Please not that due to the Data Protection Act which overrides the Freedom of Information Act and is in turn overridden by the Official Secrets Act, information on car ownership cannot be disclosed without prior consent of the owner

How come the dvlc can give your address to these parking people that are according to the Daily Mail are ripping people off the over stay there parking time in hospital car parks by a few minutes?

If we all take that view then the mamby pamby politically correct softies have won.

It isn't political correctness or softness, it's hard headed business sense that stops people taking risks with large amounts of money. The real gripe is with the cost of the unwieldy legal system.

At the end of the day the club rules are put in place to protect the club surely?

One large compensation claim could very well equal end of the club in my view, no one wants that

The frustration is understood - the committee are Minor owners just like everyone else and some have had first hand experience.
However, the rules are in place to protect the club, to allow it to continue and provide all the services that we can get.

At the end of the day the club rules are put in place to protect the club surely?

One large compensation claim could very well equal end of the club in my view, no one wants that

Indeed.
Clubs and forums have been closed due to litigation on what they allowed to be written online by the public - that's a sad fact, but doesn't stop it being true.

It's not the club's role to find out if a forum comment is true or not, and to be honest, how is anyone going to be able to tell if any supporting evidence is genuine?
Add to that, the fact that the club has a reasonable financial status - if you've got money, you're more at risk of being sued! Nothing stops a trader from being able to sue over a 'negative' comment, even if it is true. Just the legal costs to defend it in court can be high, and whilst I have the same frustration over name and shame, I'm happy that my membership money is spent on many positive things (club services!!) and not legal fees.

I can't believe what I heard on the radio this week. A claims company advertising to claim off a previous claim company/lawyer that you used on your last claim sueing them for not claiming enough for you!!! Mad innit!

smithskids wrote:How come the dvlc can give your address to these parking people that are according to the Daily Mail are ripping people off the over stay there parking time in hospital car parks by a few minutes?

How about "Bruek Parking Ltd."?

Bruce would be able to find his beloved FYY 809J at last!