Saturday, December 21, 2013

Techdirt sums up Kleargear ...

"Among the many, many problems with KlearGear's actions are the following:

1. The non-disparagement clause didn't even exist when John Palmer placed his order. He ordered in 2008, and it did not appear in KlearGear's terms of service until 2012.

2. KlearGear never actually delivered the product that Palmer ordered. The negative review on Ripoff Report appeared to be an accurate complaint about KlearGear's customer service.
3. John Palmer, who made the order, was not the same person who wrote the review. That was Jen Palmer, his wife. Even if the clause had been in there and had been binding, it would only have been on John. While KlearGear claims that John telling Jen about the problems still made him liable, that's just crazy.
4. Even if the clause had been in there, it's completely unenforceable. You can't bar someone from giving an honest review of your crappy service.
5. Palmer explained to KlearGear that Ripoff Report does not allow the removal of reviews, so that demand was impossible.
6. KlearGear not only demanded $3,500 and to have the negative review removed, it also told various credit bureaus that John Palmer owed them $3,500 that he wasn't paying, creating a serious credit problem for the Palmers.
7. When the Palmers disputed the debt claim with the credit bureaus, KlearGear insisted that the debt was legitimate and added an additional $50, again pointing to their terms of service, which had a "chargeback/dispute policy." Yes, this is adding insult to injury. Not only do they tell credit bureaus of a bogus $3,500 claim based on a bogus unenforceable term in a contract that didn't exist at the time of the failed exchange, but they add to the debt when the Palmers contested it."

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20131218/11581925605/kleargear-sued-destroying-credit-couple-who-wrote-negative-review.shtml
So lets just spell it out plain shall we? Kleargear is all about selling dead chitty merchandise on a "drop ship" basis. (Co holds zero inventory) Since many sheeple get ripped off as a rule Mr. William Franklin Bermender and his bestus enabler legal buddy Mr. Stephen L. Gutman decided to attack ANYBODY complaining ... even if such attacks are HIGHLY illegal.

Part of Mr. Bermender's plan was to have fraudulent positive reviews posted. Sadly for the crooked basterds the story blew up in their fully fraudulent faces and they are all now underground and/or on the run.