Our friend John Kelly, at the Washington Post, reports today on a home building contractor (identified as SCS Contracting Group) who has sued at least two of his former clients for defamation because they made disparaging remarks on the web about the contractor's performance.
Now, let's put ourselves in this contractor's shoes for a moment and see if this is a good strategy. Assume that, in fact, we did a good job. There were some problems--after all, there always are--but it wasn't our fault. Let's further assume that the homeowners who complained on the web did so unfairly, even to the point of exaggerating some of the facts. And let's assume at least a couple people told us they saw the posts and it made them reluctant to hire us.
Should we sue the homeowners for defamation?
Not unless we're deranged! After all, who in world would hire a contractor who might SUE if they say something bad about his work? You'd have to be crazy to invite that possibility.
In contrast, there are more positive ways to deal with a situation such as this, without ruining your own business in the process. For example, in one instance, a homeowner posted negative comments on a site called Angie's List, where consumers can evaluate service providers. The contractor could post a response, and could also get other clients to post favorable reviews. Then readers on Angie's List would have a more balanced view and might decide the one homeowner was just disgruntled. (That assumes you have satisfied customers; if not, suing the dissatisfied ones is probably not a good idea.)
Counterbalancing unfavorable web reviews is not uncommon. If you read individual reviews of restaurants on the Post's website, or one of many others that allow individuals to spout off their opinions, you'll see some pretty bad ones for even the best of restaurants. But if you look at them in context, it's pretty obvious they are outliers.
Another possibility is to work out the problems with the complaining customer. While that doesn't always work, good businesses follow-up on web complaints and try to learn from them. Again, restaurants will often offer an offended customer a perk or an apology and try to get them to give it another try.
What if, instead, a restaurant starts suing every bad reviewer for defamation? What's going to happen? That's right: empty restaurant! Bankruptcy. Not because of the bad review; but because of the responsive lawsuit.
We might very well consider hiring a contractor despite a negative review from another client. But we'd NEVER hire a contractor who'd sued a customer for defamation simply for stating their opinion on a website.
In any event, truth is an absolute defense in a libel/defamation case. Just think of the risk of losing.
