Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 34

Thread: ******** ****** are Theives!!!!

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage, AK
    Posts
    273

    Default ******** ****** are Theives!!!!

    Has anyone used these guys for any repairs? My friend took his boat there and the charged him just over three grand to rebuild his VRO pump on his evinrude and when it still didn't run they told him they didn't know what was wrong with it, and wouldn't give it back until he paid. I had the pump diagnosed as bad, installed an electric pump, removed 2 fuel line restrictions, and tuned the motor in 4 hrs. The owner Warren Holfich doesn't even have the decency to return phone calls to either my friend or I. I have informed them that they will be getting their summons to court soon, and they just don't care!!!! THESE GUYS ARE THIEVES!!!! DO NOT USE THEM FOR ANY REASON!!! They are also under the name alaska 4WD accessories.

    Has anyone else had problems with these guys? Maybe we can get together and get them shut down!!!!

    Chris
    Last edited by Brian M; 08-26-2010 at 15:36. Reason: forum rules

  2. #2

    Default

    Is this the same company that was once called ***** in Palmer? I heard they changed their name to **** **** something or other.

    Sorry to hear your buddy got a raw deal. I hope it all works out for the best.
    Last edited by Brian M; 08-26-2010 at 15:37. Reason: forum rules

  3. #3
    Member greythorn3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Chasin the ladys! away!
    Posts
    2,507

    Default

    ya i believe so i think they hang out at the alaska4x4network.com also. nothin but trouble.
    Semper Fi!

  4. #4
    Member Deak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    155

    Default

    They did poor work and went WAY over their estimate for installing a wash down pump, gps/depth finder, and second battery. They installed the washdown pump without a switch so the motor was always on unless you opened the engine compartment and disconnected a wire. The rest of their work was about on par with the washdown pump install.

    They quoted me $1100 for the whole job which I though was kind of high. I told them to call me if it was going to cost more than the $1100 because thats was already a few hundred more than I wanted to spend... Instead they called me on the next Friday and told me it was done come pick it up, its going to be $1800 because it took us a lot more time than they thought. They did give me a cool T-shirt for the extra $700 though. Rather than taking them to court I paid the bill (to get my boat back) and will never set foot on their property again.

  5. #5
    Forum Admin Brian M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Eagle River, AK
    Posts
    13,397

    Default

    I have edited out the name of the business in accordance with our forum rules. This is very important information for our members, but the name can be shared via PM or e-mail with those interested. This site cannot shoulder the liability for lawsuits stemming from negative reports.

  6. #6
    Premium Member MarineHawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian M View Post
    I have edited out the name of the business in accordance with our forum rules. This is very important information for our members, but the name can be shared via PM or e-mail with those interested. This site cannot shoulder the liability for lawsuits stemming from negative reports.
    Just asking, because I haven't looked at this recently. But has any online forum ever been successfully sued for allowing disparaging remarks about businesses or products? I assumed that there was no risk of this, partly because companies, for example, Cabela's, REI, Walmart, Target, etc, etc, allow people on their own websites to vilently savage the products they sell. Surely, REI's and Cabela's lawyers would not allow that if there was any, even remote, risk of liability. Or, as usual, am I missing something significant.

  7. #7
    Member Bsj425's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Pole, Alaska
    Posts
    1,060

    Default

    I think he is doing it to air on the side of better to be safe than sorry even if it hasnt happened yet doesnt mean that it wont happen and I for one would hate to see AOD be made an example of for something that could of easily been prohibited from him editing the name out.

    And as for the Cabelas and etc stuff I know what your talking about I read some of the reviews and am surprised that they keep them up then again they are HUGE company that will do great business regardless of what is said about them or their products so I doubt they care as opposed to a small time local company whos business can be dramatically changed just from word of mouth alone word travels fast in this small big state of ours.

  8. #8

    Default

    You don't have to be successfully sued (i.e. where you lose the lawsuit) before it costs you money to defend yourself. I think editing is sometimes a necessary evil.

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MarineHawk View Post
    But has any online forum ever been successfully sued for allowing disparaging remarks about businesses or products?
    A law suit may not stick but the defense still cost

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    132

    Default

    I wouldn't get involved in anything Warren has his hand in. I can't believe he's still in business, but if more people speak out like you did, maybe he'll finally loose enough business that he'll be forced to shut down and go back under the rock he came from.

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage, AK
    Posts
    273

    Default

    Thanks all.. I thought this might be the case.

  12. #12
    Forum Admin Brian M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Eagle River, AK
    Posts
    13,397

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MarineHawk View Post
    Just asking, because I haven't looked at this recently. But has any online forum ever been successfully sued for allowing disparaging remarks about businesses or products?
    As others have mentioned, the risk for us isn't so much a successful lawsuit so much as the cost of defending against a lawsuit. While busy, this site is not exactly a cash cow, and having to defend against such a suit would potentially bankrupt the site. The other issue is that we cannot be expected to be the arbiter of conflicting stories. When someone's negative report is vehemently contested by the company, that puts us in a no-win situation. It's not an ideal solution, as much of this information is important, but given the alternatives it is the best we can do.

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage, AK
    Posts
    273

    Default

    I think I'll do more than speak out, I'm going to try to get my friend to sue include all three names on the reciept in the lawsuit. I know I would quit if I got summoned to court. Anyone want to sign a written statement?

  14. #14
    Premium Member MarineHawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian M View Post
    As others have mentioned, the risk for us isn't so much a successful lawsuit so much as the cost of defending against a lawsuit. While busy, this site is not exactly a cash cow, and having to defend against such a suit would potentially bankrupt the site. The other issue is that we cannot be expected to be the arbiter of conflicting stories. When someone's negative report is vehemently contested by the company, that puts us in a no-win situation. It's not an ideal solution, as much of this information is important, but given the alternatives it is the best we can do.
    Thanks. and I wasn't meaning to question yor approach, but only to wonder what if any legal risks there are.

  15. #15
    Premium Member MarineHawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bsj425 View Post
    ... And as for the Cabelas and etc stuff I know what your talking about I read some of the reviews and am surprised that they keep them up then again they are HUGE company that will do great business regardless of what is said about them or their products so I doubt they care as opposed to a small time local company whos business can be dramatically changed just from word of mouth alone word travels fast in this small big state of ours.
    Just for clarification, I wasn't referring to comments on Cabela's website about Cabela's. Obviously, Cabela's is not going to sue itself for allowing defamatory comments about itself on its own website. I'm referring to the fact that Cabela's allows (I think it's a good thing) very harshly-critical comments about the stuff they sell from various manufacturers and retailers. Similarly, Midway lets people post reviews with allegations of potentially-dangerous malfunctions by the ammo they sell.

  16. #16
    Moderator LuJon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Palmer, AK
    Posts
    11,415

    Default

    I can't think of a single vendor that could afford to launch a lawsuit against Cabelas. Even if they won I doubt that they would win enough to make it worth their while and probably not enough to even begin to cover the legal expenses. I can only imagine the legal staff that cabelas must have on retainer!!

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southwest Alaska
    Posts
    2,146

    Default

    No, no forum has ever been sued for that. This forum is owned by people who want to make money, and guaranteeing there will never be a negative report is a selling point. Why do you think this website is packed with vendor ads and scripts and cookies?

    It is their website, they own it, they make the rules. So if you want to post real info that real people can use, just post "had an experience with a boat motor rebuilding outfit, PM me for details".
    Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocre minds. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence. Albert Einstein

    Better living through chemistry (I'm a chemist)

    You can piddle with the puppies, or run with the wolves...

  18. #18
    Moderator LuJon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Palmer, AK
    Posts
    11,415

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nitroman View Post
    No, no forum has ever been sued for that. This forum is owned by people who want to make money, and guaranteeing there will never be a negative report is a selling point. Why do you think this website is packed with vendor ads and scripts and cookies?

    It is their website, they own it, they make the rules. So if you want to post real info that real people can use, just post "had an experience with a boat motor rebuilding outfit, PM me for details".
    Nirto, a 5 second google search proves you are completely wrong. A number of forums have been sued and in more than one case it killed the site even if they "technically" won. I appreciate the joy you must take in espousing rhetoric about some deep seated money grubbing conspiracy but honestly this is just good sense and business practice. Would you go into work and cuss out your boss then expect to not get fired? Makes about as much sense. Is there anyone here who wants to see Mike get sued and the site shut down? I know I sure don't!!

    http://www.managingcommunities.com/2...n-your-forums/

  19. #19
    Forum Admin Brian M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Eagle River, AK
    Posts
    13,397

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MarineHawk View Post
    I'm referring to the fact that Cabela's allows (I think it's a good thing) very harshly-critical comments about the stuff they sell from various manufacturers and retailers.
    Incidentally, we do allow gear reports that tell folks about gear failure/poor performance. That is a different situation than accusations of misconduct.

  20. #20
    Premium Member MarineHawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LuJon View Post
    I can't think of a single vendor that could afford to launch a lawsuit against Cabelas. Even if they won I doubt that they would win enough to make it worth their while and probably not enough to even begin to cover the legal expenses. I can only imagine the legal staff that cabelas must have on retainer!!
    I think the large army of lawyers at the Cabela's disposal is relevant, but not for a different reason. A single decent sole practitioner can defeat the largest corporation and it's retained big law firms if the facts and law are good. I work at a very large law firm, and my clients' annual revenues generally range $100MM up into the billions. And I have a fair skill at what I do, but I can't beat a mediocre lawyer with the facts and law clearly on his/her side. Where the issues are more complex and, perhaps, novel, is where the big companies legal resources can shine (and they can beat down a smaller foe in drawn-out proceedings).

    That being said, Cabela's clearly relies on its competent lawyers to identify legal threats. I figure, Cabela’s, Midway, REI, Walmart, etc … wouldn’t be stupidly allowing these kinds of attacks on the commercial entities and their products, if there was any exposure. So, I looked it up.

    The Communications Decency Act (or “CDA,” found at 47 U.S.C. § 230) creates federal immunity to any cause of action that would make interactive computer service providers liable for information originating with third-party user of service.

    The CDA states:

    It is the policy of the United States— … (2) to preserve the vibrant and competitive free market that presently exists for the Internet and other interactive computer services, unfettered by Federal or State regulation; …

    (c) Protection for “Good Samaritan” blocking and screening of offensive material
    (1) Treatment of publisher or speaker
    No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.”

    47 U.S.C. § 230 (emphasis added). Section 230 defines “interactive computer service” as “any information service, system, or access software provider that provides or enables computer access by multiple users to a computer server, including specifically a service or system that provides access to the Internet and such systems operated or services offered by libraries or educational institutions”--e.g., AO forums. 47 U.S.C. § 230(e)(2). The term “information content provider” is defined as “any person or entity that is responsible, in whole or in part, for the creation or development of information provided through the Internet or any other interactive computer service.” Id. § 230(e)(3).

    As the court in the seminal case on point held:

    By its plain language, § 230 creates a federal immunity to any cause of action that would make service providers liable for information originating with a third-party user of the service. Specifically, § 230 precludes courts from entertaining claims that would place a computer service provider in a publisher's role. Thus, lawsuits seeking to hold a service provider liable for its exercise of a publisher's traditional editorial functions--such as deciding whether to publish, withdraw, postpone or alter content--are barred. … The purpose of this statutory immunity is not difficult to discern. Congress recognized the threat that tort-based lawsuits pose to freedom of speech in the new and burgeoning Internet medium. The imposition of tort liability on service providers for the communications of others represented, for Congress, simply another form of intrusive government regulation of speech.” Zeran v. America Online, Inc., 129 F.3d 327, 330 (4th Cir. 1997).

    Cabela’s doesn’t avoid lawsuits because of its large army of lawyers. Rather, it’s large army of lawyers have identified a federal statute that immunizes Cabela’s from lawsuits based on the comments of others who disparage (accurately or not) other people and entities. That’s why Midday’s customers can say that so-and-so's defective cartridge almost go them killed, without the threat of a lawsuit against Midway.

    FWIW, there may be many good reasons for not permitting disparaging remarks on AO, but I can’t see hardly any plaintiffs’ lawyers wasting a second filing a lawsuit that is, on its very face, eviscerated by a federal statute. Even if they did, you could get it easily dismissed for failure to state a claim on which relief can be granted. You’re just as, if not more, likely to get sued by PETA or some anti-gun nut for promoting violence against animals or firearms violence in general. As baseless as those legal theories sound, they’re only likely defeated by lack of causation, standing, and other related defenses. But they aren’t facially barred by a federal statute. Thus, arguably, if you are not going to allow disparaging remarks about businesses on here—primarily out of fear of unfounded litigation—you also likely should avoid all the gun talk as well.

    Like I said, there may be other good reasons to for the censorship of business names, but fear of a lawsuit doesn’t make much sense to me.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •