‘Acted with malice’: B.C. man’s negative reviews on Google, Yelp cost him $90,000 in defamation case

Article content material

A disgruntled buyer who was discovered to have defamed a B.C. wooden merchandise firm in his Google and Yelp critiques has been ordered by a decide to pay $90,000 in damages.

Article content material

Tyler Ginther posted the net critiques about Longhouse Specialty Forest Merchandise, claiming that the corporate was fraudulent and deceitful.

Article content material

In November 2015, Ginther had met a gross sales consultant from the corporate who was doing chilly calls within the White Rock space.

Ginther, who had constructed a number of houses over time, was developing a home and the 2 males mentioned his plans and the merchandise of the Parksville firm, which focuses on customized reduce and stained cedar, fir and hemlock constructing provides.

Ginther claimed in subsequent on-line critiques that the corporate defrauded, scammed or deceived him by charging him for cedar siding they knew he had not ordered. He argued at trial that what he had mentioned was true.

However in a ruling on the case, B.C. Supreme Court docket Justice Nitya Iyer discovered that Ginther was not a reputable witness and he had not confirmed the allegations.

Article content material

“I conclude that the defendant defamed the plaintiffs in his Google and Yelp critiques,” mentioned the decide.

Longhouse, a household enterprise, claimed that Ginther had broken their status and triggered them financial loss, and that he had acted with malice. They sought common, aggravated and punitive damages totalling $675,000, in addition to particular prices.

However the decide mentioned the quantity for common damages being sought, $125,000 every for Brian and Moila Jenkins, the 2 named principals of the corporate, was extreme as a result of there was no proof that anybody who knew them and browse the critiques believed Ginther’s accusations.

“The ubiquity of Web critiques is now a reality of enterprise life. Whereas adverse critiques could deter potential prospects, a variety of critiques is widespread, and an inexpensive reader will train judgment in assessing them.”

Article content material

The decide awarded the Jenkins a complete of $60,000 typically damages and one other $20,000 typically damages for the corporate itself.

“I discover that Mr. Ginther acted with malice when he posted the Yelp evaluate,” mentioned the decide. “As famous, he admitted that his intention was to hurt the plaintiffs’ enterprise.”

The decide awarded the Jenkins $5,000 every for the aggravated damages, however declined to award punitive damages or particular prices.

Bernard Lau, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, mentioned in an e mail that his shoppers have been “more than happy” with the end result and are grateful for the courts in vindicating their names and reputations.

“They will lastly breathe a sigh of aid and put this matter behind them,” Lau mentioned within the assertion. “It was a really tough time for them when the posts got here out, significantly as they arrive from a close-knit neighborhood in Parksville and the false allegations about them and their integrity put them by means of numerous pointless stress and impacted their enterprise and private lives drastically.”

Article content material

Lau mentioned he hopes the case serves as a reminder that posting feedback on-line, even within the context of an “innocuous” Google evaluate, has real-world penalties and probably even vital monetary ramifications.

In an e mail, Ginther mentioned that he “clearly” disagreed with the decide’s discovering that he was not a reputable witness and added that an attraction of the ruling is being thought of.

He declined to say what the grounds of any attraction could be.

Ginther mentioned the rationale why the case turned a “battle” was that he was delivered a “substandard” product which was late and was overcharged on his visa for a second product he believed he by no means ordered.

These are just like the claims that he made within the critiques that have been rejected by the decide.

Article content material

Greg Allen, a Vancouver defamation lawyer, mentioned that if you wish to evaluate a enterprise on Google or Yelp, you ought to be aware to maintain your language measured and cautious.

“The difficulty on this case is that the defendant took the place at trial that all the things he mentioned was true however he simply wasn’t believed by the trial decide,” he mentioned.

“So in that circumstance the place you make allegations which might be type of incendiary in nature, you run the danger of getting the enterprise proprietor pursue you in defamation, and your important defence in that circumstance is that what you mentioned is true.”

Allen mentioned $90,000 in damages will not be one of many bigger awards for defamation typically, however within the particulars of the case does appear to be on the increased finish of the vary.

kfraser@postmedia.com

Extra information, fewer adverts: Our in-depth journalism is feasible due to the help of our subscribers. For simply $3.50 per week, you will get limitless, ad-lite entry to The Vancouver Solar, The Province, Nationwide Submit and 13 different Canadian information websites. Assist us by subscribing right now: The Vancouver Sun | The Province.