Here's an option for those groups working on considering advocacy:  learn
html and let the world find your issues online.  As the article shows, it
really works.

kelly

   from the New York Times

      January 8, 1999


 By CARL S. KAPLAN

Unhappy Customers Find a Complaint Site Pays Off

     It's a familiar tale: Joe Consumer gets poor service and complains
     to the large company. But his gripes fall on deaf corporate ears,
     and Joe gets no relief.

     That could have been the script for George Musser Jr. and Talia
     Schaffer, a couple who moved from San Francisco to Hoboken, N.J.,
     last year with the help of Bekins Van Lines Co., then discovered
     that some of their property had been damaged or lost in transit.

     The couple did one thing that resulted in a happy ending for them,
     however. After letters and phone calls to the company got them
     nowhere, they set up a Web site (www.bekinsbeware.org) and posted
     their story of woe. Their lawyer brought the site to the attention
     of the moving company, and the couple's claim for $1,734 was
     immediately settled in full -- on the condition that Musser and
     Schaffer take down their gripe site.
     _________________________________________________________________

   Complaint sites have the potential to bring pressure on companies that
   may not listen to small-fry consumers.
     _________________________________________________________________

     "The Net gives consumers a lot of leverage," said Herbert I.
     Waldman, the couple's lawyer. "The Web site obviously motivated
     Bekins."

     Waldman was so pleased with his client's experience that he now
     believes so-called complaint sites have the potential to become
     effective legal tools to bring pressure on companies that may not
     listen to, or settle the legitimate claims of, small-fry consumers.

     "If you bring a suit to a cleaner and they do a lousy job, you can
     seek damages and picket in front of the store," said Waldman, a
     lawyer at Stern, Dubrow & Marcus in Maplewood, N.J. "Or you can go
     to a newspaper and publicize your claim. But those perfectly
     legitimate tactics have limited impact. Go on the Net, though, and
     your speech capability is magnified."

     Complaint sites where consumers air their beefs about large
     companies have existed on the Web for several years. Among the many
     examples are sites about the Walt Disney Co. and America Online.
     Companies have targeted some complaint sites for legal action. So
     far, however, no such sites are known to have been used by lawyers
     when negotiating with companies on behalf of consumers.

     Lawyers and experts on legal ethics agreed with Waldman that
     complaint sites could be used in the future as bargaining chips in
     settling claims.

     Some lawyers warned that consumers who publish complaint sites run
     the risk of a lawsuit for libel if the posted information contains
     false and defamatory information. There could also be other risks,
     including the threat of trademark infringement suits for complaint
     sites that use company names or logos -- although the law on that
     issue remains unclear.

     The libel trap didn't bother Musser and Schaffer. "We knew what we
     had written on our site was the absolute truth," said Schaffer, an
     English professor on leave from San Francisco State University who
     is currently teaching at Bryn Mawr College near Philadelphia. Her
     husband is an editor at Scientific American.

     Scott Ogden, president and general counsel at Bekins Van Lines,
     said in a written statement that Bekins was "concerned that we
     disappointed" Musser and Schaffer, but added that only a small
     percentage of the company's shipments result in claims. "We're
     sorry that this customer and his attorney felt the need to develop
     a Web site, even prior to Bekins having the opportunity to resolve
     this claim," he said.

     Musser and Schaffer's account, which was first reported this week
     in the New Jersey Law Journal, began in June, when the couple
     decided to move across the country with the help of Bekins, based
     in Hillside, Ill. When the moving truck arrived at their new home,
     they scanned the unloaded boxes quickly and signed an inventory
     form acknowledging that everything was in good order, their lawyer
     said. When they started unpacking, however, they realized that some
     of their property was broken, and other things, including a bed
     platform and the legs of a desk, were missing.

     Subsequent calls and letters to Bekins failed to get results,
     Schaffer said. At the end of July, the couple filed a formal claim
     with the company seeking $1,734 for the damage and losses. Bekins
     declined liability, saying that the couple had essentially waived
     their rights because they signed the inventory receipt after the
     move, Waldman said. The couple maintained they were pressured into
     signing the form and did not have time to look into every box
     before the truck left.

     In what they said was an effort to warn other consumers, the couple
     created the Web site on October 22. "We felt helpless because
     Bekins was not responding to our letters or phone calls," Schaffer
     said. " And we couldn't find a lawyer to take our case because the
     [claim] was small. We wanted to warn other people that this is what
     the company did. I don't think it occurred to us at that time that
     Bekins might settle."

     The site, topped with the headline "Beware Bekins Van Lines,"
     explained the couple's story. "When we recently moved from
     California to New Jersey, Bekins broke or lost a significant chunk
     of our stuff," it began. Web surfers seeking information on Bekins
     could easily stumble across the complaint site. Even now, for
     example, search results for "Bekins" on the AltaVista search engine
     list the site as the tenth entry.

     In November, an article about moving companies in The Chicago
     Tribune mentioned bekinsbeware.org, and the couple's site began
     receiving 75 to 100 hits a week, Schaffer said. Also, at least five
     people sent e-mail relating their own bad experiences with Bekins
     or other moving companies, she said. The couple revamped the site
     and solicited more e-mail complaints, but did not post any of them
     for fear of exposing themselves to libel suits.

     Waldman, who is distantly related to Schaffer, met the couple at a
     family party in November. "They told me the whole story," Waldman
     said. "I told them, 'That's a very interesting thing you did with
     your Web site. I bet Bekins will settle with you in return for
     taking down the Web site.'"

     On Dec. 1, Waldman spoke to a claims supervisor at Bekins, who
     offered a settlement of a few hundred dollars. Waldman responded
     that his clients were very upset and had set up a Web site that
     could be harmful to Bekins. He also said his clients were
     considering posting the names and addresses of other people who had
     sent them tales about their experiences with the company. He then
     told the claims supervisor to go to a computer after their phone
     call and punch up "Bekins" on a search engine.

     "Ten minutes later I got a phone call saying we would get full
     replacement for everything, on condition we take down the site,"
     Waldman said. "That sounded fair to me."

     Two days later the company signed a settlement agreement, and it
     sent out a check the following week. Musser and Schaffer replaced
     the opening page of bekinsbeware.org with the statement: "This page
     has been removed as part of a legal settlement."

     Mark Pruner, a lawyer and president of Web Counsel, which gives
     advice to lawyers on Internet issues, said he believes the
     leveraging of a complaint site to help along a claim is legitimate.
     "I think what this does is significantly change the balance of
     power between claims-dispute executives and people with small
     claims," he said. "Basically, it brings social opprobrium to bear
     on the company."

     Stephen Gillers, a professor at New York University School of Law
     and an expert in legal ethics, said he believed a lawyer could
     ethically advise a client to set up a complaint site as a way to
     strengthen a lawsuit. "There is a First Amendment right to post
     information on a Web site, so long as the information is not
     defamatory," he said. "As part of a settlement, you could negotiate
     for the withdrawal of that information" on the complaint site, he
     said.

     Gillers added that besides vetting for possible libel claims, a
     lawyer should make sure that any threat he makes about exposing
     damaging information on a Web site to win a settlement does not run
     afoul of state or federal extortion laws.

     At least one lawyer said he would not recommend to a client that he
     establish a complaint site to win a settlement. "It's a very risky
     technique" because it might invite lawsuits for libel or other
     claims, said Martin H. Sampson, a lawyer at New York's Phillips
     Nizer Benjamin Krim & Ballon.

     But Waldman is undeterred. Assuming there is no defamatory material
     on the complaint site, and the victims don't inflate their claims
     to unethical levels, "I might use this tactic again," he said.


   Copyright 1999 The New York Times Company


VICUG-L is the Visually Impaired Computer User Group List.
To join or leave the list, send a message to
[log in to unmask]  In the body of the message, simply type
"subscribe vicug-l" or "unsubscribe vicug-l" without the quotations.
 VICUG-L is archived on the World Wide Web at
http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/vicug-l.html