Careless craftsman?

[Sir Duke]

With a bit of bad luck, you might risk it. If a person's name is strongly associated with the company's name, there is a risk that a court would judge a derogatory statement about the company as defamation of the person.
This, of course, means that one should be careful when writing negative things about one-man companies.

It's not derogatory to post a review next to the company name and upload pictures of the thresholds, is it? The craftsman is satisfied and claims there's nothing wrong?

 

[pmd]

It's not derogatory to post a review next to the company name and upload pictures of the thresholds, is it? The craftsman is satisfied and claims there's nothing wrong?

When it comes to defamation, the purpose of the statement is important. If you write a review with the intention of maligning someone, it could be defamation, but in your example, I don't think the risk is very high.

However, I wrote my comment just to nuance the claim that you cannot defame a company. This is literally true, but you can still be guilty of defamation of a person if you "defame" a company under certain specific circumstances.

 

[Sir Duke]

When it comes to defamation, the purpose of the statement is important. If you write a review with the intention of smearing a person, it could be defamation, but in your example, I don't think the risk is so great.

My comment, however, was only to nuance the claim that you can't defame a company. That's literally true, but you can still be guilty of defaming a person if you "defame" a company, under certain specific circumstances.

I understand, but TS writes in about 30 posts that she doesn't want to expose anyone. So there's no intent to defame. I mean, of course she can post pictures of the craftsmanship, the same pictures she's posted here. The firm will interpret it as praise since they themselves were satisfied.

 

[pmd]

I understand, but the thread starter writes in about 30 posts that she doesn't want to expose anyone. So there is no intent to defame.

Yes, the thread starter's intention is hardly to defame the contractor, but intent isn't something you decide on your own. It's the court that determines it.

I mean, of course she can post pictures of the craftsmanship, the same pictures she's posted here. The company will interpret it as praise since they were happy themselves.

In that last sentence, there might be a hidden intent...

But as I wrote in post #162, the thread starter will hardly need to write a review with pictures of all the faults since the dispute seems to be going to ARN.

The risk of being prosecuted for defamation is probably not very high anyway.

 

[Sir Duke]

Yes, the intention of TS is unlikely to be to defame the craftsman, but you don't entirely decide the intent by yourself. It is the court that decides.

In that last sentence, there might be a hidden intent...

But as I wrote in post #162, TS will hardly need to write a review with pictures of all the errors since the dispute seems to end up with ARN.

The risk of being charged with defamation is probably not very high anyway.

Are all negative reviews defamation?

 

[Karinsbostadsrätt]

With a bit of bad luck, one could risk it. If a person's name is strongly associated with the company's name, there's a risk that a court might consider a derogatory statement about the company as defamation of the person. Therefore, one should be cautious about badmouthing one-man companies.

Yes, the OP's intention is hardly to defame the craftsman, but one's intent is not entirely self-determined. It's the court that decides.

In that last sentence, there might be a hidden intent...

But as I wrote in post #162, the OP will probably not need to write a review with pictures of all the mistakes since the dispute seems to be going to the ARN.

The risk of being charged with defamation probably isn't very big anyway.

Absolutely right, it's tricky to expose companies as it may be classified as defamation if you don't have a hundred-percent grasp of the legislation and exact wording, etc. My goal is to get this resolved. I understand that people want to know which company it is, but I can't share the name. Now I hope for a solution!

 

[Karinsbostadsrätt]

Defamation against companies does not exist. However, if you point out individuals in the company, that's another matter.

It's complex, and I don't want to go into that question. Now, I will focus on getting the carpentry fixed and closing this unfortunate case.
https://www.familjensjurist.se/fraga-juristen/ovrigtannat/fortal-mot-foretag/

If I can give some advice to other novices on how to avoid this: Have super clear quotes and written agreements for the slightest deviation, use checklists and hire an inspector when the job is done.

 

[j.f.s]

You were too quick to quote.

Removed the post to keep the thread from being disrupted with irrelevant discussion.

 

[pmd]

Are all negative reviews defamation?

No, of course not. Why?

 

[Sir Duke]

No, of course not. Why?

Because you're so anxious in the thread.
Of course, you can post pictures next to a company name on Offerta, etc. The company was even satisfied with the work and it's impossible to take it as criticism.

 

[pmd]

We? I initially just pointed out that you can actually end up being charged with defamation if you badmouth a company because someone claimed you couldn't. Then there were a lot of irrelevant comments about it. There's hardly any risk of defamation in this case.

 

[Bölebon]

Looks more like sabotage! How can you build so f...ing badly and charge for it as well.

 

[Bölebon]

this is how the door is, it must be considered straight or should the spirit level be spot on?[image] [image]

How can one not see that the bubble is completely off? Why use a spirit level if you’re not following the bubble???

 

[andersmc]

I personally would also be very restrictive when it comes to exposing companies.

But most often when you experience problems of this kind, it's about a company with several employees where maybe a single person is misbehaving. I myself am employed at a smaller carpentry firm, and we have sometimes ended up hiring a bad apple who seemed good but did poor work resulting in costly complaints (which we naturally rectified). In such situations, I think it would be highly regrettable to expose an entire company because of one employee's mistakes, especially after we have corrected the errors.

It's still the company's fault. They are responsible, even for their failed employees.

If they're not completely sure that the employee is doing a satisfactory job, they simply have to send someone there to check. Even if they are sure, they can check if the customer is satisfied.

 

[Sir Duke]

Looks more like sabotage! How can they build so damn poorly and also charge for it.

Exactly my point.

If the company refuses to fix the poorly nailed thresholds with the argument that they were not covered by the contract, then it's not about a poorly executed service. It's about vandalism.