My cousin hired a company called Toscano Floor Designs in New York and the agreement states: Purchaser agrees not to attack/criticize or write negative reviews online about the seller. This should have been a red flag for what was about to come.
Depends. For a $20 gift card? No.
Buy me a fully paid off house with homeowner insurance for the rest of my life? Maybe.
A billion dollars, tax-free? Hmmm yea I’d be very tempted, very likely to take the deal. I mean my voice wasn’t that loud anyways, I mean like… my one 1-star review weren’t ever gonna hurt them, might as well take the deal, I’d make sure to read through all the fine prints in the agreement.
The Consumer Review Fairness Act makes it illegal for companies to include standardized provisions that threaten or penalize people for posting honest reviews. For example, in an online transaction, it would be illegal for a company to include a provision in its terms and conditions that prohibits or punishes negative reviews by customers.
Leave a bad review for them breaking the law. Each time they threaten you, append it to your review.
Sadly, this act only covers “form contracts” for the sale of services or products, and doesn’t look like it would extend to contracts of employment. That is, a consumer cannot be bound by a clause that prohibits writing reviews. And if a consumer of the company’s products is also an employee, then this act doesn’t prohibit a “no reviews” clause in the employment contract.
But that’s not the situation in this scenario. OP’s brother hired this firm to perform a service, and thus this law should apply
Whoops, you’re right. I misread the first sentence as though OP’s brother was hired by the company. In that case, yes, this act would appear to void any clause that would restrict writing a review, whether good or bad.
They should make a law that is upheld about things like this.
Visits White House
“Felt creepy, too much gold. Zero stars.”
FBI: hi there…
It should be an illegal clause
Is it though?
See the top comment
In some places, yes, probably. It would most likely fall under anti-SLAPP protections.
IANAL though, so it could be more complicated.
It’s not enforceable. Contract law understands that sometimes contracts are garbage.
But it voids that clause in the contract. So they can leave as many reviews as they like and the company can do jack shit to impose sanctions for doing so.
They can stick that contract where the sun doesn’t shine. There is zero chance I’d sign it. They can remove that clause or they can remove themselves… their choice.
No, there should be a law to stop stupid things in agreements like forced arbitration, no bad reviews etc
Not sure I can give up that right where I live.
As the other commenters said, it is illegal. The most important thing is to be informed about your rights so that people and companies do not take advantage of you.
I would never hire a company that had a clause like this. Just find someone else. There’s a reason they felt it necessary to include that.
I worked with an accountant for years and he got his ass bit by some asshole who left him a negative, and false, review.
He added a clause on renewal contracts with new language saying you won’t leave a negative review and to arbitration.
I told him I’m not signing this. I never leave reviews and I understand he’s trying to mitigate his losses and force arbitration but I told him that it wasn’t going to work.
That’s just the company expecting to deliver you bad services/products before they even know who you are. Absolute clown behavior.
1 star is not negative; it’s probably positive. So yeah. Unless it defines what negative means, the ambiguity favors me. ;)
In my book no review is as bad as a bad review, in the company had no reviews as they would all be bad I would look else where
You ever see a dump truck that says “not responsible for broken windshields”? Guess what. EVERY truck — this is US law anyway — is responsible for securing its load. So why do they have the sticker? So you don’t bug them about it. Or at least so most people don’t bug them about it. They also say stay back 200 feet. That’s not a law. It’s just a bumper sticker and is equally as enforceable. If they crack your windshield because they didn’t secure your load, you (or rather your insurance company) can go after them. But the truth is, most insurance companies just write off so many broken windshields per however long anyway, they won’t go after the company even if you have proof. But they could — and so could you.
Post the review anyway. Or at the very least post a review that says “the terms say I can’t post a negative review so believe me when I say the service was acceptable.” It’s not a negative review. It’s not a positive review either. It’s a neutral review and it calls out the clause. It is heavily implied to be opposite of what you said. You said the work was acceptable, implying it’s unacceptable. If you used the same tactic and said the work was great, the opposite would appear true, that it was not great. But acceptable is not great. So say it was acceptable and imply you were forced to say that. Thusly, an intelligent person will see your message for what it is.
The sign could be about missiles - rocks on the road kicked up by the trucks tires - rather than the truck spilling its load.
That’s why trucks are required to have mud flaps.
I once had a semi kick up a piece if asphalt the size of a baseball. Dunno how much the mud flaps helped. Bit scary seeing it come straight for my head at 80mph.
Agreements like that are not enforceable, and yeh they’re a red flag for sure.
Have a friend write “I had a friend who had an awful experience …”
