Hacker News Reader

Comment by duxup | Hacker News Reader

>Ginther claimed in subsequent online reviews that the company defrauded, scammed or deceived him by charging him for cedar siding they knew he had not ordered. He argued at trial that what he had said was true.

>But in a ruling on the case, B.C. Supreme Court Justice Nitya Iyer found that Ginther was not a credible witness and he had not proven the allegations.

The article isn't clear if his claims were true or not. The judge doesn't seem to believe him. Those are very specific claims. If they were untrue then I could see this outcome / I don't necessarily disagree.

I haven't posted many negative reviews online but the few I have all have been specific and accurate.

View on HN

Yeah, getting sued for defamation for a bad review, and getting sued for defamation because of allegations of fraud, are not quite the same.

This is why the US sensibly protects opinion (this company committed fraud) based on disclosed facts (they charged me for siding I did not order), and flips the burden that the plaintiff has to prove the defendant knew the purported facts were untrue.

Which I mean, Ginther still obviously believes he did not order siding that he was charged for.

>Ginther still obviously believes

Well he claimed it, not sure if he is lying and maybe knows it.

Why would you jump to “he’s lying” and not “he’s mistaken”?

I'm saying what he says is not necessarily what he knows.

As for the rest the judge already decided he wasn't credible as far as the judge was concerned.

…how exactly is that different from lying in your mind?

“Not credible” as far as proving that the plaintiffs acted fraudulently, which is a far cry from the plaintiffs proving that his allegations were false.

“Not credible” applies to his testimony.

What do you mean? He would obviously know if he placed the order, and if he was charged for it. Either he's lying or his not, but he can't be mistaken.

Like thinking he ordered X amount but it was actually Y amount, or placing an order and it taking so long you forgot about it so you place it again, or ordering the wrong product code and failing to verify it, or skimming over the order and missing that the salesman added extras for whatever reason and signing it anyway, or…

If he didn’t remember placing the order, or believed that the order was modified, then at worst he’s mistaken, not lying.

You seem to be implicitly ruling out mental illness. It's absolutely possible that he earnestly believes this without it being true.

The article says it was over the phone. Last month I went to a shop to order a specific size shower which would be delivered next day. The employee took my order, I paid and left. While driving home I got an email with my order, but I didn't check it.

The next day I come to get my delivery and realise it is not the correct size, I check my email and indeed the size is not correct. The shop made no issue and ordered a new one but I lost 4 days.

So who knows?

Thats not correct. When placing these orders a sales person will put a sku code or a in house reference number on the quote document that doesnt actually mean anything to a normal person and agree to do work that the implementation team cant or wont do (this should sound familiar to people here). Ive seen this done personally.

They also dont charge all up front and might just want a deposit. So they might not realize the cost is higher. Its very easy for a immoral salesperson to try and get a customer to unwilling pay for something. And they have incentives to do so.

why not and why is this important?

It would be nice to know whether or not the company did charge him for cedar siding, and if they did whether the company had a record of Ginther placing the order. Disappointed that information is not included in the article.

More info here:

https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2022/2022bcsc1461/2022...

Looks like Ginther did receive many confirmation emails listing the order.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com