An Online Retailer Fined a Couple $3,500 for Writing a Negative Review

Business Insider
Analyzing the top news stories across the web
Dec. 18 2013 3:41 PM

Kleargear Fined a Couple $3,500 for a Negative Review, Then Dinged Their Credit Score

1387398171

Kleargear.com

This post originally appeared in Business Insider.

Advertisement

An online retailer is being sued after fining a couple $3,500 for a negative review and then dinging their credit score when they didn't pay the fine. The lawsuit, which is seeking damages of at least $75,000, accuses KlearGear.com of defaming customers John and Jen Palmer, inflicting emotional distress, and violating the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act.

"Companies like KlearGear.com that engage in abusive consumer practices need to be deterred," said Scott Michelman, an attorney with the Washington, D.C.-based consumer advocacy group Public Citizen, which is filing the lawsuit on behalf of the Palmers.

John Palmer had purchased a desk toy and a keychain on Kleargear in December 2008, according to the lawsuit. When the order failed to arrive within several weeks, John's wife, Jen Palmer, says she tried to contact the company to find out what happened.

She couldn't contact anyone by phone but she eventually reached a representative by email, who told her the order had never been paid for, the lawsuit claims.

Palmer then posted a negative review of the company on RipoffReport.com, in which she accused Kleargear of having "horrible customer service practices."

"There is absolutely no way to get in touch with a physical human being," the review from February 2009 says.

More than three years later, John Palmer got an email from Kleargear demanding that the review be removed within 72 hours or he would be fined $3,500. The email reportedly cited Kleargear's terms of sale, saying it included a non-disparagement clause that prohibits customers from "taking any action that negatively impacts" the company.

"If the content remains, in whole or in part, you will immediately be billed $3,500.00 USD for legal fees and court costs until such complete costs are determined in litigation," the clause read, according to TechDirt. "Should these charges remain unpaid for 30 calendar days from the billing date, your unpaid invoice will be forwarded to our third party collection firm and will be reported to consumer credit reporting agencies until paid."

Kleargear appears to have removed the clause from its terms of sale within the last couple months but it appeared on the website as recently as August 2013. The lawsuit claims the clause was not included in the terms of sale when the Palmers' order was placed. 

When John Palmer explained that he didn't write the negative review, but that his wife had, a KlearGear representative stated in an email that "[i]f you disparaged KlearGear to another person who published negative content, you have still breached the terms of our sales contract," according to the lawsuit. 

Jen Palmer contacted RipoffReport to remove her post, but the website told her there is a $2,000 charge for taking down reviews. When the Palmers didn't pay Kleargear the $3,500 fee within 30 days, the company contacted credit bureaus, which dinged their credit score, the lawsuit says.

"The consequences to the Palmers have been quite serious," Michelman said. "They have been denied credit, they have had loans delayed, and through a three-week period in October they had no heat in their home because their furnace broke and they couldn't obtain a loan to purchase a new one."

Business Insider was unable to reach anyone by phone or email at Kleargear.

Hayley Peterson is a retail reporter for Business Insider. Follow her on Twitter.

TODAY IN SLATE

Justice Ginsburg’s Crucial Dissent in the Texas Voter ID Case

The Jarring Experience of Watching White Americans Speak Frankly About Race

Here’s Just How Far a Southern Woman May Have to Drive to Get an Abortion

The Most Ingenious Teaching Device Ever Invented

Marvel’s Civil War Is a Far-Right Paranoid Fantasy

It’s also a mess. Can the movies do better?

Behold

Sprawl, Decadence, and Environmental Ruin in Nevada

Space: The Next Generation

An All-Female Mission to Mars

As a NASA guinea pig, I verified that women would be cheaper to launch than men.

Watching Netflix in Bed. Hanging Bananas. Is There Anything These Hooks Can’t Solve?

The 2014 Kansas City Royals Show the Value of Building a Mediocre Baseball Team

  News & Politics
The World
Oct. 20 2014 1:50 PM Why We Shouldn’t be Too Sure About the Supposed Deal to Return the Abducted Nigerian Schoolgirls
  Business
Moneybox
Oct. 20 2014 2:16 PM Even When They Go to College, The Poor Sometimes Stay Poor
  Life
Outward
Oct. 20 2014 2:19 PM A Procedural Rule Could Keep Gay Marriage From Ever Reaching SCOTUS Again
  Double X
The XX Factor
Oct. 20 2014 1:10 PM Women Are Still Losing Jobs for Getting Pregnant
  Slate Plus
Tv Club
Oct. 20 2014 7:15 AM The Slate Doctor Who Podcast: Episode 9 A spoiler-filled discussion of "Flatline."
  Arts
Brow Beat
Oct. 20 2014 1:26 PM This $248 Denim Jumpsuit Is the Latest Example of a Horrible Fashion Tradition
  Technology
Future Tense
Oct. 20 2014 1:51 PM Will Amazon Lead Us to the Golden Age of Books? A Future Tense Event.
  Health & Science
Medical Examiner
Oct. 20 2014 11:46 AM Is Anybody Watching My Do-Gooding? The difference between being a hero and being an altruist.
  Sports
Sports Nut
Oct. 20 2014 10:23 AM Where I Was Wrong About the Royals I underestimated the value of building a team that’s just barely better than mediocre.