Slashdot Mirror


Woman Facing $3,500 Fine For Posting Online Review

sabri writes "Jen Palmer tried to order something from kleargear.com, some sort of cheap ThinkGeek clone. The merchandise never arrived and she wrote a review on ripoffreport.com. Now, kleargear.com is reporting her to credit agencies and sending collectors to fetch $3,500 as part of a clause which did not exist at the alleged time of purchase. 'By email, a person who did not identify him or herself defended the $3500 charge referring again to Kleargear.com's terms of sale. As for Jen being threatened — remove the post or face a fine — the company said that was not blackmail but rather a, "diligent effort to help them avoid [the fine]."' The terms and conditions shouldn't even apply, since the sales transaction was never completed."

519 comments

  1. A "Cheap ThinkGeek Clone?" by Press2ToContinue · · Score: 5, Funny

    Oh Slashdot - you're so edgy. Calm down.

    --
    Sent from my ENIAC
    1. Re:A "Cheap ThinkGeek Clone?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Indeed, there's so much hate they can't even link the domain.

    2. Re:A "Cheap ThinkGeek Clone?" by i+kan+reed · · Score: 4, Informative

      I was going to comment that Dice hasn't done anything to ruin thinkgeek yet, but they don't actually own that one.

    3. Re:A "Cheap ThinkGeek Clone?" by synapse7 · · Score: 5, Funny

      I think I come to this site out of long term habit more than anything else.

    4. Re:A "Cheap ThinkGeek Clone?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I thought it was funny especially because ThinkGeek seems to do little more than buy stuff from DealExtreme, mark it up a lot, then try to resell it to the gullible.

    5. Re:A "Cheap ThinkGeek Clone?" by Dogtanian · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I was going to comment that Dice hasn't done anything to ruin thinkgeek yet, but they don't actually own that one.

      What's so great about ThinkGeek anyway? When it comes down to it, they're basically just a seller of novelty gadgets and boys toys with a geek-oriented marketing angle.

      I've ranted about them previously, but to tl;dr that, the problem is that in (rather successfully) using this angle to sell their gimmicks, they presented and promoted a relentlessly consumerist view of what it is to be a geek... both by exploting the need to identify and belong (show how much of a proud geek and/or fan of this geek-popular TV show you are by owning this gizmo!) and by flattery (owning this stuff shows that you're clever!).

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    6. Re:A "Cheap ThinkGeek Clone?" by sumdumass · · Score: 3, Informative

      What's so great about ThinkGeek anyway? When it comes down to it, they're basically just a seller of novelty gadgets and boys toys with a geek-oriented marketing angle.

      You really don't know?

      I've ranted about them previously, but to tl;dr that, the problem is that in (rather successfully) using this angle to sell their gimmicks, they presented and promoted a relentlessly consumerist view of what it is to be a geek... both by exploting the need to identify and belong (show how much of a proud geek and/or fan of this geek-popular TV show you are by owning this gizmo!) and by flattery (owning this stuff shows that you're clever!).

      They seem to have been one of the first places I know of to cater to geeks. They don't just have look it's shinny things, but things, even if they are toys, that are interesting in their own right.

    7. Re:A "Cheap ThinkGeek Clone?" by dbIII · · Score: 2

      That's the "American Way".

    8. Re:A "Cheap ThinkGeek Clone?" by s.petry · · Score: 1

      You really don't know?

      Nope, no idea. I'm not the person you are responding to. A summary would be nice.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    9. Re:A "Cheap ThinkGeek Clone?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh Yeah? Whenever I looked around there they were just selling plastic "gimmick" crap gadgets from China, no HP calculators, Model M keyboards or little programmable LISP telephones.

    10. Re:A "Cheap ThinkGeek Clone?" by sumdumass · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I put the part in bold from his comment but it seems it was masked by the quote.

      "they're basically just a seller of novelty gadgets and boys toys with a geek-oriented marketing angle." is why.

      It was the first popular one stop shop for most of the cool and interesting crap I could waste my money on. They seemed to focus more on fun then necessity too. They came up with witty slogans and put them on everything and it is something that a lot of geeks either "just got" or wondered why it wasn't obvious to them once they figured it out.

      In short, the reason is because they are or were the Cabelas of the geek world even if their crap was cheaply made and overly priced.

    11. Re:A "Cheap ThinkGeek Clone?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They make it fun to participate and their customer service is always amazing.

    12. Re:A "Cheap ThinkGeek Clone?" by s.petry · · Score: 1

      Thanks!

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    13. Re:A "Cheap ThinkGeek Clone?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How many just buy it because they think its cool, over trying to convince them, using some psychological non-sense to buy it or else he/she is the oddball let out of the circle?

      Why rant over a site unless they are ripping you off like kleargear, has done, you buy or try to buy an item and it never gets shipped.

    14. Re: A "Cheap ThinkGeek Clone?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh shut up

    15. Re:A "Cheap ThinkGeek Clone?" by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      but they do advertise on slashdot.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    16. Re:A "Cheap ThinkGeek Clone?" by fractoid · · Score: 1

      When it comes down to it, they're basically just a seller of novelty gadgets and boys toys with a geek-oriented marketing angle.

      You want MORE?

      --
      Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
    17. Re:A "Cheap ThinkGeek Clone?" by Phoghat · · Score: 1

      and WOT says they are untrustworthy, plant tracking cookies, and have had numerous customer complaints. just sayin'

      --
      Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
    18. Re:A "Cheap ThinkGeek Clone?" by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      It's that ThinkGeek seems to actively- and only- promote the idea of geekdom being something that revolves around however many spuriously intelligent toys you own and nothing more.

      I would think they have to because that is how they make their money. I'm not sure anyone is looking at them for some moral guidance or anything, just to buy cool stuff and have fun. That is what I would expect from a company that sells things.

    19. Re:A "Cheap ThinkGeek Clone?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (rather successfully) using this angle to sell their gimmicks

      They sell stuff too?

      I thought it was just a listing of geeky toys I can add to my amazon orders for free shipping.

  2. Well.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    That's a good way to lose business.

    1. Re:Well.. by Penguinisto · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Are you kidding? With the right lawyer (or DA, or even consumer protection agency), it's a great way for her to eviscerate kleargear.com for fraudulent practice.

      The stupid 'you can't say we ripped you off even if we do, nyah nyah' clause that kleargear.com chucked into their site is patently unenforceable. It's like my dumbassed last employer who tried to force everyone laid off to sign a 'non-disparagement' clause, holding their severence pay ransom unless they did. (one phone call to my own lawyer right there in the office stopped that BS cold.)

      By the way, it wouldn't take much to dispute the "fine" with the reporting agencies, either.

      As for the negative publicity? Is the old fuckedcompany.com still running? I don't feel much like tickling the company proxy here to find out...

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    2. Re:Well.. by SCPRedMage · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's only "unenforceable" from a legal standpoint, but before it ever even sees a courtroom, it's already intimidated enough people to raise the company's BBB rating from an F to a B, and ruined other people's credit; the couple from TFA have been turned down for loans due to the credit hit they've taken because these guys sent that $3500 "penalty" to collections.

      Why pay court costs for a judge to enforce your schemes when you can get the credit bureaus to do it for free?

      --
      My sig can beat up your sig.
    3. Re:Well.. by almitydave · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well then it seems the couple has suffered real financial harm. Hopefully they can quantify this and collect damages. I hate the sue-happy culture of the US these days, but this case demonstrates exactly what lawsuits are for.

      There's no way the company can claim ignorance due to the facts:
      -The transaction was never completed, so the contract didn't apply
      -The contract at the time (that didn't apply anyway) didn't include the clause about reviews
      -The person attempting to purchase the item, and who would have been bound by the contract (but wasn't) wasn't the person who wrote the review

      These are all facts that were plain at the time of the company's action; so in other words, they knowingly filed a false credit claim based on a non-existent clause in a contract that didn't apply to someone with whom they didn't do business anyway.

      Our prisons are already full, so I think the appropriate penalty would be massive fines against the company, and all legal and executive personnel involved in this action, and if that can't be accurately determined, all legal and executive personnel.

      --
      my, your, his/her/its, our, your, their
      I'm, you're, he's/she's/it's, we're, you're, they're
    4. Re:Well.. by sumdumass · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Fuckedcompany seems to be down since 2007.

      But you are right, any lawyer could have a field day with them. Especially if the story summery is correct. If her husband purchased the gifts, then it would have been him not her that agreed to any EULA no matter how stupid it might have been. So by going after her, who hasn't even agreed to the terms, they are literally doing something fraudulent and possibly criminal to boot.

    5. Re:Well.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > summery

      Heh, illiteracy.

    6. Re:Well.. by Cordus+Mortain · · Score: 2

      Our prisons are already full, so I think the appropriate penalty would be massive fines against the company, and all legal and executive personnel involved in this action, and if that can't be accurately determined, all legal and executive personnel.

      I completely agree. Unfortunately they didn't do it to Wall Street, what makes you think they'll do it to other companies?

    7. Re: Well.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it's just really nice weather outside at the moment.

    8. Re:Well.. by ngc5194 · · Score: 1

      Is the old fuckedcompany.com still running?

      Short answer: No.

    9. Re:Well.. by RespekMyAthorati · · Score: 1

      s/liberals/libertarians/
      You got it backwards.

    10. Re:Well.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Possibly? It's called Fraud which is a felony offense regardless of whether it's in-state or interstate. Honestly, I wouldn't want to be them. The government doesn't like competition on that front so they usually punish them harshly.

    11. Re:Well.. by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Sorry, no. I can understand why you might have that perception, but the fact here is that on this issue, the liberals and the extremist (economic) libertarians (the ones who think all the roads should be privatized, etc.) are in agreement, as well as the Republicans. How can this be? Simple: the liberals will defend any of Obama's actions or inactions, even when they're identical to something the Republicans would have done. So these days, liberals are big proponents of no-strings bailouts, bogus healthcare "reform" that only benefits insurance companies and was designed by a right-wing thinktank, warmongering, NSA spying on citizens, prosecuting marijuana crimes at the Federal level and busting medical marijuana dispensaries, etc. Heck, if Obama suddenly decided to round up homosexuals and put them in concentration camps, and ban contraception too, the liberals would be all for those things as well.

    12. Re:Well.. by meglon · · Score: 1

      Ahh... another full of shit conservative. You need to pull your head out of your ideological ass and take a look at reality.

      Once reason the ACA has such low numbers is because there are as many liberals who don't like it as their are teabaggers that don't like ANYTHING associated with Obama (Obama Derangement Syndrome). Liberals are at least intelligent enough to undertsand there's two reasons for not liking the ACA... the conservative reason: it goes too far (even though the Heritage Foundation originally came up with most the crap in it); and the liberal reason: it's not universal healthcare, which is easier to implement, has no loopholes, and would be less costly for taxpayers both publicly and privately. But the ACA doesn't just benefit insurance companies, and only someone devoid of any fucking clue would still be stupid enough to think that.

      NSA spying on citizens? Think back, if you will, to the people who were against the PATRIOT Act when the cowardly conservatives rammed it through in 2001. Predominately liberals. Most of those people are still against it, as well as TSA, ad the Homeland Security proliferation. As much as the teabaggers whine about it, when push comes to shove, they're still for it: http://www.nationalmemo.com/house-republicans-hold-a-hearing-to-defend-nsa-surveillance/

      Marijuana? Seriously? Are you a fucking idiot as well as illiterate and living in a cave?

      Bailouts? Had we not helped the banks and let them crash, you'd look longingly back to the great recession as the nice little slowdown preceding the next Great Depression. Again, only someone without a clue would think letting that large a portion of the entire countries economy collapse into chaos is a good thing. However much liberals realize something had to be done (as opposed to republicans who thought the economy was just fine (think: the GOP platform at the time; McCain specifically saying it out loud), many liberals want to see heads roll. Bankers should be in jail, any bank too big too fail should be broken up and never allowed to grow again, and Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act should be repealed. The problem: even bringing that up nets a rousing chorus of "that'd be socialism" from the fucking idiots on the right that don't understand what the word means, and are too stupid to look it up.

      Many liberals disagree with Obama on a lot of little things, and some big things, BUT, he is a hell of a lot better than ANY republicans would ever begin to be. Republicans need to get back to putting this countries needs over their parties politics.... something they haven't done in about 20 years now.

      If Obama came out tomorrow saying everyone should keep breathing, 4-8 minutes later every teabagger in this country would be dead, a well as most of the republican politicians who have enabled the fringe Birchers wanna-be's.

      --
      Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
  3. in sue happy america by ruir · · Score: 2

    can't just she go to court for harassment and get rich?

    1. Re:in sue happy america by noh8rz10 · · Score: 1

      anybody can sue anybody for anything. it doesn't mean you'll win, and even if you do your winnings may pale in comparison to your legal costs.

      Once I sued my neighbor because her cat kept defecating in my potted plants. Judge said that I couldn't show any actual monetary damages, so that was the end of that.

    2. Re:in sue happy america by mmell · · Score: 1

      Sure - but I'll bet their lawyers can beat up her lawyer. Welcome to America, land of the free (unless you can afford something better)!

    3. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Because it's been somebody's companion for 10 years? Because it's the one thing that makes their kid smile? Because killing is not proportionate to the offense?

      You really can't train a cat to stop defecating in a place that's really ripe for burying poop. All you can do is put a scent around it, which the neighbor could have paid for.

    4. Re:in sue happy america by Shakrai · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's how the system is supposed to work. I'm assuming you went to small claims court, right? Small claims courts can't offer injunctive relief (i.e., a court order compelling her to keep the animal off your property), all they can do is offer monetary relief, and you didn't have any monetary damages.

      Frankly I think that's a pretty silly thing to sue over and it must have made you really popular in the neighborhood. There's a ton of effective ways to keep cats out of your yard, ranging from harmless (garden hose) to nasty (anti-freeze), hardly seems like something worth dragging the courts into.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    5. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's 50+ years in jail. If it was a person, there wouldn't be a problem.

    6. Re:in sue happy america by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      can't just she go to court for harassment and get rich?

      Do you have a lawyer who will take that case for what you can afford to pay them? If so, sure. Else, haha no.

    7. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      You needed one of these: http://norris.org.au/cattack/

      I built it over the summer, it was heaps of fun and worked really well. Though...it took me so long that by the time it was finished the garden had grown up! Always next season!

    8. Re:in sue happy america by farble1670 · · Score: 1, Funny

      Once I sued my neighbor because her cat kept defecating in my potted plants

      you'd be amazed how many problems a BB gun will solve.

    9. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not with the popehat signal being lit on her behalf, they can't.

    10. Re:in sue happy america by SirGarlon · · Score: 5, Informative

      The only people who get rich by going to court are the lawyers.

      --
      [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
    11. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sorry, but what did you expect the neighbour to do? Are they meant to magically make a sentient being not want to poo in the freshly dug soil that evolution has made it want to poo in?

    12. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Once I sued my neighbor because her cat kept defecating in my potted plants.

      I suspect the cat thought its shit belonged on your property, since you seem to be such a pile of shit. Suing your neighbor over this? Really?

    13. Re:in sue happy america by swb · · Score: 2

      Should have hired a professional gardener to re-do the pots. Then you would have had a proven monetary damage.

    14. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nah, that's mildly racist. In Texas they let you shoot Hispanics, too.

    15. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or put together a small electric fence around the plants. Just save the receipt for the parts.

    16. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, that's a way to get yourself not just sued, but criminally prosecuted, and with good reason.

    17. Re:in sue happy america by Shakrai · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Keep your cat indoors. Problem solved. It's more humane for the cat (indoor cats live longer in general), better for the neighborhood wildlife, and makes it impossible for your cat to suffer traumatic injury from automobiles, dogs, etc. The cat may not like it as much, but there's a reason why you're the owner of the animal.

      And yes, I am a cat owner. Rescued one of the neighborhood strays. She still wants to go outside, but it's not happening. Her quality of life is higher and I don't have to worry about her never coming home for reasons forever unknown.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    18. Re:in sue happy america by SJHillman · · Score: 1

      Or they could just be expected to keep the animal on their own damned property... in most places, cats aren't allowed to roam unleashed off your property any more than dogs - it just isn't enforced as much because cats have less of a chance of causing bodily harm (in other words, they're really good at hiding the body).

    19. Re:in sue happy america by amicusNYCL · · Score: 2

      As long as you satisfy all of the natural instincts that your cat has that she would otherwise satisfy for herself outside, then it's fine to keep a cat indoors. Otherwise, it's not very humane and it sounds a little selfish on your part.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    20. Re:in sue happy america by cusco · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      BB gun != air rifle

      My BB gun doesn't even injure pigeons, just scares the crap out of them. We go hunting for pigeons with my brother-in-law's air rifle.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    21. Re:in sue happy america by cusco · · Score: 2

      Electric fences work wonders for keeping racoons and herons out of goldfish ponds. On the other hand, it also keeps your spouse from doing any weeding at all in that part of the garden.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    22. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      humane, quality of life

      I don't think those mean what you think they mean. Your cat is, by your own admission, pretty miserable. You wouldn't subject a person to this kind of treatment and call it humane, why is it an exception for pets? Extending life expectancy is not providing a higher quality of life, in fact they're often on opposite ends of the spectrum. (Do you want to eat bacon or live longer? The joke is on the guy who spends an extra 20 years on the wrong end of life, waiting to die while not being able to chew bacon even if he wanted to.)

      People fear death so much that it results in all kinds of fallacies.

    23. Re:in sue happy america by meerling · · Score: 3, Informative

      True, and to earn the hatred of all cat owners.
      Besides, a hose, supersoaker, or the like works well.
      On the other hand, if you don't want to sit around waiting to soak the local felines, just go buy some of the scent based repellents. There are a number of them for sale in pet stores, and a bunch of old fashioned recipes you can make yourself.
      Killing or maiming someones pet is just going to get you in so much shit the cat poop would seem to be gold nuggets in comparison.
      (I know one person that ended up moving over the harassment he got when he shot a neighbors cat. Also, every potted plant and his entire lawn died. It's assumed that one or more persons put herbicide on all of them.)
      Same thing with dogs. Actually, any family pet.

    24. Re:in sue happy america by Shakrai · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Stopping my cat from assisting in the destruction of the local ecosystem is selfish? Keeping her away from traffic, aggressive dogs, and asshole humans is selfish? Preventing her from getting fleas and ticks is selfish?

      Every cat owner I know who lets their cats go outside has lost at least one of them. The shitty part is they almost never find out why. Did the cat get run over? Did it become a meal for a larger animal? Was it taken in by the crazy cat lady down the street?

      A cat's natural instinct is to kill as many small animals as possible while producing as many kittens as she can. We stop them from satisfying these urges all the time and I've never heard it called inhumane. I think the medical care, limitless supply of food, and shelter she doesn't have to compete for is a good trade off, from her point of view, particularly given the alternatives. There's a reason why cats domesticated themselves....

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    25. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They invented this thing called the "switch" a while back.

      No, not the piece of networking equipment.

    26. Re:in sue happy america by stymy · · Score: 0

      Especially if you load it with rock salt (I had kind of a wild childhood).

    27. Re:in sue happy america by tompaulco · · Score: 2

      That's 50+ years in jail. If it was a person, there wouldn't be a problem.

      You say this in jest, but I know a person who killed a human being directly with her automobile while drunk and received probation. This person's girlfriend accidentally killed a pet rabbit by not remembering to feed it, and she is facing jail time.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    28. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remove tags, take to SPCA.

    29. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As long as you satisfy all of the natural instincts that your cat has

      So you are opposed to spaying and neutering?

    30. Re:in sue happy america by Todd+Palin · · Score: 1

      ".. in most places, cats aren't allowed to roam unleashed off your property any more than dogs" I am a cat owner. I have never heard of any place that has a cat leash law. I do think it might be a good idea, but I am not aware of anywhere it has been enacted. Can you give me a few specific examples of "most places"?

    31. Re:in sue happy america by Joining+Yet+Again · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Except for the cat two days ago who was blinded in one eye by a BB gun.

      There is a very simple rule which I have been taught from a young age to apply to all guns (my school had a cadet force, so lots of people were trained in firearms before adulthood): if you're not okay with killing it, don't shoot at it.

    32. Re:in sue happy america by SydShamino · · Score: 1

      A requirement to "satisfy all of his natural instincts" is silly. It's in his nature to want to piss on everything and breed with every random cat he can find - but instead he's been fixed. It's in his nature to kill all sorts of birds regardless of their rarity - but instead he gets to chirp at them through the window and eat a tasty grain-free chicken meal. It's in his nature to hunt and kill small rodents, but instead he hunts cloth toys and his sister and the occasional moth that slips in the door and sometimes our hands under the quilt.

      What matters is that he's safe and healthy and intellectually satisfied. How that occurs is up to the owner.

      --
      It doesn't hurt to be nice.
    33. Re:in sue happy america by Joining+Yet+Again · · Score: 0

      Please never have children.

    34. Re:in sue happy america by Dahamma · · Score: 3, Informative

      Doesn't matter, you can still go to jail for cruelty to an animal for shooting one with a BB gun - in some areas it's a felony. It's not all that much different than if you shot their kid with a BB. "Bah, it's only a small welt" isn't going to convince the judge...

      Besides... YOU'LL PUT YOUR EYE OUT!

    35. Re:in sue happy america by Joining+Yet+Again · · Score: 1

      I don't want to live where you live.

      Where I live, cats and humans have a right to roam.

      I care for your hairless monkey property law about as much as the cat does.

    36. Re:in sue happy america by Shakrai · · Score: 3

      This person's girlfriend accidentally killed a pet rabbit by not remembering to feed it, and she is facing jail time.

      For what charge, and in which jurisdiction??

      In my state that would be a Class A Misdemeanor, at most, and you don't do jail time for those unless there are aggravating circumstances and/or you already have a lengthy criminal record.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    37. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      this is correct. black people shoot other black people all the time and nobody cares.

      white person shoots a black person, it's front page news.

      "man bites dog", right?

      for whatever it's worth (I'm sure you're immune to logic), the prosecuting office in the "detroit girl shot in face" case have already said that it will most likely be classified as homicide (note "denfensive shooting" is not classified as homicide) and have requested police assistance in putting together a case most likely to result in a conviction. As for Trayvon, anybody who followed the facts of the case (note, the facts, not the wild opinion and sensationalizing) and knows anything about the law, knows that was a justified shooting. A man (17 year old travon was physically a man) assaulting another man's head repeatedly with a block of concrete is 100% grounds for self-defense-due-to-fear-for-life in all 50 states. no "stand your ground" required. no "concealed carry" required. nothing else required.

      But keep going. I'm sure you're doing wonders for this country's ability to make it to a real post-race society by continually fanning the flames of any possible race-based tension anywhere you can find it. go ahead and pick that scab! jam a knife into it while you're at it, it'll work out for the best in the end... somehow... right?

    38. Re:in sue happy america by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

      Where I live, cats and humans have a right to roam.

      Yeah. That's not gonna fly when you get caught pooping in next door's yard, is it?

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    39. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's in his nature to hunt and kill small rodents

      Indoor cats can still do that. They're called feeder mice. I don't think it makes much of a difference from the mouse's point of view if he's being killed by a feline instead of a snake....

    40. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep - they aren't different from dogs in that way... one way to prevent it is to (humanely) catch it and take it to the nearest animal shelter/control where she can pick it up. Assuming she has it chipped/tagged she can pay a fee/fine and get it back. If not she's not very responsible anyway... and if she asks, say "oh, I did take a stray to the shelter, I assumed it wasn't yours since it had no identification".

    41. Re:in sue happy america by Dahamma · · Score: 1

      Just put it on switch. You don't really want it wired up 24-7 anyway, or what's the point of having it?

    42. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They *are* in the city I live in. Anything that shoots a hard projectile are all lumped into the same category... So my son's AirSoft guns are prohibited right along with the C02 powered pellet guns the delinquent behind us uses to shoot out the street lights.

      Neighbors... Don't live with them, can't shoot them..

    43. Re:in sue happy america by bobbied · · Score: 0

      We expanded that a bit in my house... If you shot it, you had to eat it, unless there was a very good reason you needed to kill it.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    44. Re:in sue happy america by bobbied · · Score: 1

      { click click click }

      that is the sound of handcuffs ratcheting, closing on your wrists.

      How did you know he had three hands?

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    45. Re:in sue happy america by ArbitraryName · · Score: 2

      BB gun != air rifle

      Umm, yes, it certainly does. That's like saying a gun that fires 22 Short does not equal a firearm.

    46. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is one of my favorite automated animal deterrents, also works well on teenage boys who come to peek into my daughter's window at night. Easy to find via Google.

    47. Re:in sue happy america by sunderland56 · · Score: 1

      You sued the neighbour? She wasn't defecating in your plants, was she?

      Seriously, if you think that anyone has any control over when/where/what a cat chooses to go..... just take it as a hint that your plants needed some fertilizer and move on.

    48. Re:in sue happy america by cusco · · Score: 2

      This is why one takes up gardening in the first place, to have a place to put the bodies . . .

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    49. Re:in sue happy america by lgw · · Score: 3, Funny

      Where I grew up, shooting a kid with a shotgun (loaded with rock salt) was considered an object lesson about property rights, and we'd have been shocked if anyone went to jail for it. How times have changed.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    50. Re: in sue happy america by eam · · Score: 2

      Get a Scarecrow. Not the small 's', old school, "off to see the wizard" kind. The kind that is a water sprinkler attached to a motion sensor. They really work!

    51. Re:in sue happy america by lgw · · Score: 1

      Did your country's "right to roam" historically include the right to roam over to the neighboring country in boats, loot rape burn and pillage, then carry home the spoils?

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    52. Re:in sue happy america by farble1670 · · Score: 1

      it's also illegal to allow your pet to poop and piss on other people's property.

    53. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Once I sued my neighbor because her cat kept defecating in my potted plants

      you'd be amazed how many problems a BB gun will solve.

      What is wrong with a plant spray bottle?

    54. Re:in sue happy america by Joining+Yet+Again · · Score: 1

      Well, England's certainly done that to most of the world, but it wasn't part of the right to roam ;).

      Fortunately, looting, raping, burning and pillaging are not on most cats' agendas... at least not while we're watching.

    55. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ih you think shooting anythng with a gun made the past better ..... you are fucked up and should seek medical help.

    56. Re:in sue happy america by Joining+Yet+Again · · Score: 1

      lol, well, I can try and see...

      Seriously, though, there'd be a tort in there for pooping, and probably opportunity for an anti-social behaviour order or restraining order. A tort could similarly apply to a pooping cat's owner in law, as consequence to any real damage caused, but the ASBO+restraining order don't seem appropriate to apply to a creature who cannot have a conception of property rights.

      Something like that, anyway.

    57. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Meh.. shoot, shovel, shut up, nobody finds out.

    58. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And why would next door have an issue with it?

      The only possible issue I can see is that a small child might pick up poop, and get toxoplasmosis. In which case, the correct response is to teach your child not to pick up poop.

      Other than that, the cat is fertilising your plants for you!

    59. Re:in sue happy america by swb · · Score: 1

      How exactly do you load a BB gun with rock salt?

      The only "rock salt" I've ever seen are irregular chunks that wouldn't fit in a BB gun, which is only designed to fire a round pellet 4.5mm in diameter.

      I suppose you could wedge smallish chunks of rock salt in a single-shot, breech loading BB gun, but the terminal performance would be awful, probably not developing enough energy to hurt anything. And the salt would more likely foul the barrel and action, inducing rust.

      I have heard (but have never seen) of people creating rock salt loads for *shotguns* which makes more sense. But it would still be hell on barrels and I'm not sure what real use there would be for it.

    60. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stopping my cat from assisting in the destruction of the local ecosystem is selfish? Keeping her away from traffic, aggressive dogs, and asshole humans is selfish? Preventing her from getting fleas and ticks is selfish?

      Every cat owner I know who lets their cats go outside has lost at least one of them. The shitty part is they almost never find out why. Did the cat get run over? Did it become a meal for a larger animal? Was it taken in by the crazy cat lady down the street?

      A cat's natural instinct is to kill as many small animals as possible while producing as many kittens as she can. We stop them from satisfying these urges all the time and I've never heard it called inhumane. I think the medical care, limitless supply of food, and shelter she doesn't have to compete for is a good trade off, from her point of view, particularly given the alternatives. There's a reason why cats domesticated themselves....

      I let my cat go outside. I let him out when I leave for work, and he always comes home before sundown. I have a GPS tracker on his collar--he very seldom goes beyond 75' of the house. It is a very quiet street, and has lots of trees and bushes.

      I imagine it will shorten his life, but quality of Life is important too.

    61. Re:in sue happy america by farble1670 · · Score: 0

      what happened during your upbringing that made you think it's okay for you to drop crap in my yard? seriously, WTF is wrong with you?

      but anyway, i have a simple solution: control your animal. it's illegal for your animal to poop or pee in my yard. keep it out, obey the law of the land, the have some common courtesy, and we'll be fine.

      You'd be amazed at how many new problems even talking about shooting a domestic
      animal can bring into your life.

      nah, i'm good.

    62. Re:in sue happy america by Hotawa+Hawk-eye · · Score: 1

      How about a hair dryer on a motion sensor to scare the cat away with noise and hot air? Or a shop vac with the hose set into the exhaust port?

      Kitty might not make it to the potted plant before it defecates.

    63. Re:in sue happy america by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      She wants to go outside ... ... that is not going to happen
      Her quallity of life is higher ?

      The only positive thing about your post is: you call her a 'she' and a 'her' and not an 'it'.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    64. Re:in sue happy america by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 2

      Yeah, tell us more of this nonsense.
      A shotgun loaded with rocksalt can as easily kill one as it was loaded with lead.
      So you did it? And you where lucky not to kill anyone? And now you are bragging about it?
      Wow, impressive ...

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    65. Re:in sue happy america by farble1670 · · Score: 0

      what's wrong with obeying the law and keeping your pet out of other people's yards? if you obey the law in the first place, problem solved. don't ask others to spend money and time to protect against your animals. do you really feel okay about making people pick up your cat's crap, or scrape it off their shoes?

      and seriously, do you expect that i cover every square foot of my yard with overpriced cat repellent?

    66. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except if you were Lord of the manor etc.

    67. Re:in sue happy america by Karzz1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      She let a rabbit *starve* to death. Think about that for a minute. You don't "accidentally forget" to feed an animal in your care for days on end. That is animal abuse plain and simple and would also fall into the category of torture. Both of these are (low-level) felonies in all states to the best of my knowledge.

      To be honest, both of these people sound like the dregs of society and not anyone I would want to admit associating with.

      --
      Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master.
    68. Re:in sue happy america by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      That is simply solved.
      In front of wittnesses out of my neighbourhood I forbidd my cat to pee and poo outside of my garden.
      Everybody knows then: I did not allow it!

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    69. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you even know what a BB gun is?

    70. Re:in sue happy america by almitydave · · Score: 1

      As long as you satisfy all of the natural instincts that your cat has that she would otherwise satisfy for herself outside, then it's fine to keep a cat indoors. Otherwise, it's not very humane and it sounds a little selfish on your part.

      Close - what matters most for "responsible cat ownership" is whether your cat is happy and healthy. Cats that venture outdoors can certainly find happiness there, but it's a tremendous health risk for all the reasons people mention. The thing is, "satisfaction of instincts" can be detrimental to any creature, depending on the instinct and the circumstance.

      For instance, my cat has a profound instinctive desire to maul my wife. This is extremely detrimental both to the cat's chances of survival and the happiness of everyone who lives under my roof.

      --
      my, your, his/her/its, our, your, their
      I'm, you're, he's/she's/it's, we're, you're, they're
    71. Re:in sue happy america by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      Those were his 3 legs.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    72. Re:in sue happy america by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      It is not "her point of view".
      It is your point of view!

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    73. Re:in sue happy america by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      indoor cats live longer in general

      So do animals in zoos. Doesn't mean it's good. Quality of life and all.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    74. Re:in sue happy america by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      "The price is wrong, bitch. You're getting spayed!"

      -Bob Barker

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    75. Re: in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think harming an animal should be the first step. But I have warned neighbors if I think any of their animals come upon my property and damage anything or threaten anyone on my place.killing them will be an option I will use. I have told them all this. The same applies to own pets. I don't care to like or know my neighbors, that is why I live in a rural area. Local law told me more or less what happens on my property they will not get involved with unless I used cruel traps. Cats are trapped and scared, second time dumped off at shelter. Dogs that growl at me equal dead if they don't leave.

    76. Re:in sue happy america by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      When he says BB gun, he is probably thinking of one of those super low power units that pushes the BB out using a spring.

    77. Re:in sue happy america by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      Stopping my cat from assisting in the destruction of the local ecosystem is selfish? Keeping her away from traffic, aggressive dogs, and asshole humans is selfish? Preventing her from getting fleas and ticks is selfish?

      Cats are predators. If you both prevent your cat from hunting, as well as don't satisfy those impulses with toys or other stimulation, then that's a problem for the cat. Keeping a cat indoors is not the only way to prevent fleas and ticks. It's also not your responsibility to keep your cat away from dogs or people, the cat is perfectly capable of doing that itself. The selfish part is that you don't want the cat to go outside in case it doesn't come home for whatever reason and then you're sad. I've had outdoor cats my whole life. One of them died of natural causes outside of the house and we found her body later. One of them got ran over by a car, and the other 4 did not die outside. They are perfectly suited to taking care of themselves. If a cat doesn't want a dog to see it, the dog won't see it.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    78. Re:in sue happy america by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure that ALL cats are interested in is looting, raping & pillaging.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    79. Re:in sue happy america by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Sigh! You are not supposed to have a period (aka '.') between the 'if' and the 'else'! Also capitalizing the 'Else' (o! shit, now I did do the same mistake) is a grave mistake!
      Please consider using braces, aka '{' and '}' over needless capitalization and ruthless usage of periods (aka '.') in your future posts.
      Thank you!

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    80. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know where he was lucky... but I can tell that "where" != "were". They're not even homonyms!

    81. Re:in sue happy america by GameMaster · · Score: 4, Funny

      Wow, I'd imagine that'd make Cheney-style hunting accidents kind of awkward...

      --

      Rules of Conduct:
      #1 - The DM is always right.
      #2 - If the DM is wrong, see rule #1
    82. Re:in sue happy america by Greyfox · · Score: 1

      Perhaps you should reconsider the quality of the people you associate with. Just sayin'

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    83. Re:in sue happy america by Joining+Yet+Again · · Score: 1

      Aw, my cat does a lot of snuggling to me at night, so there must be that too...

      Maybe he rapes me after I've fallen asleep :o. I should set up a web cam...

    84. Re:in sue happy america by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      You REALLLLLLY don't want to know.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    85. Re:in sue happy america by bobbied · · Score: 1

      I suppose it would there Mr. Donner... But we never had that situation to deal with.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    86. Re:in sue happy america by lgw · · Score: 3, Interesting

      A shotgun loaded with rocksalt can as easily kill one as it was loaded with lead.

      Not beyond about 3 feet, rocksalt isn't exactly aerodynamic (plus sine you have to load those yourself in the first place, it's not like you're going to use a full charge.

      So you did it? And you where lucky not to kill anyone? And now you are bragging about it?

      Did you miss the part about "where I grew up". Buddy of mind got shot - stings like a bitch. I got bit by dogs set on me. We both did a lot of running away.

      But those were different times - you'd walk out into the woods in the morning, and parents wouldn't care where you were till sunset (and no one wore pads to ride anything, though you could wear a particularly heavy coat while sledding and not be taken for a wimp needing a good beating).

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    87. Re:in sue happy america by F.Ultra · · Score: 1

      In which country is that illegal?

    88. Re:in sue happy america by lgw · · Score: 1

      If you let your cat out, and he has claws, you'll certainly see him bring home the spoils of war. Nothing says love like waking up to a pile of bunny heads on the bead and a row of bunny bodies on the floor.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    89. Re:in sue happy america by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      Yes, but then we kicked arse in 1066 and took over the show.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    90. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what's wrong with obeying the law and keeping your pet out of other people's yards? if you obey the law in the first place, problem solved. don't ask others to spend money and time to protect against your animals. do you really feel okay about making people pick up your cat's crap, or scrape it off their shoes?

      and seriously, do you expect that i cover every square foot of my yard with overpriced cat repellent?

      You are one overly uptight asshole if you really think that.

      What do you do about squirrels shitting in your yard? They're no one's pets. How about birds that shit on your car? You call the cops on them because the damn birds broke the law?

    91. Re:in sue happy america by lgw · · Score: 1

      Pretty much everywhere these days. Governments want you to join their military before doing that sort of thing, so that they pick who gets pillaged. Makes all the legal difference in the world.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    92. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      anybody can sue anybody for anything. it doesn't mean you'll win, and even if you do your winnings may pale in comparison to your legal costs.

      Once I sued my neighbor because her cat kept defecating in my potted plants. Judge said that I couldn't show any actual monetary damages, so that was the end of that.

      What a total jackass you are. I'd be pitching huge piles of dog shit onto your front door after you did that if you were my neighbor.

      What do you do about squirrels or other wildlife that shits all over you yard, on your house, on your car, and if you're not careful on you?

    93. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's an air rifle that shoots BBs.

    94. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are a fucking asshole.

    95. Re:in sue happy america by Knightman · · Score: 1

      But those were different times - you'd walk out into the woods in the morning, and parents wouldn't care where you were till sunset (and no one wore pads to ride anything, though you could wear a particularly heavy coat while sledding and not be taken for a wimp needing a good beating).

      Today that's called extreme sporting...

      --
      --- Reality doesn't care about your opinions, it happens anyway and if you are in the way you'll get squished.
    96. Re:in sue happy america by Joining+Yet+Again · · Score: 1

      Oh yes, he does like bringing me snacks from time to time, and catches his own. Hunting is much more efficient (and humane) than farming and processed food, although humans can be squeamish about it...

    97. Re:in sue happy america by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 1

      Except for the cat two days ago who was blinded in one eye by a BB gun..

      Was it a Red Ryder?

    98. Re:in sue happy america by farble1670 · · Score: 1, Redundant

      You are one overly uptight asshole if you really think that.

      you are nihilistic and self centered if you think it's okay to make people handle disgusting stinking cat poop because you are too lazy to provide an environment for your own pet in your own yard.

      i challenge you to ask 5 of your non-pet owning friends how they feel about stepping in shit from other people's pets in their own yard. to the rest of humans, this is common sense but i think you might be surprised at the answers.

      You call the cops on them because the damn birds broke the law?

      i guess you are trying to use some absurd logic here? birds and squirrels are a natural part of the environment. your pet is not. my yard is not your cat's ecosystem. you want to have a cat, good for you. take care of it in your house and your yard. you smell the poop in the little box or in your flower bed.

      i'll also peg cats that hang out stalking under my bird feeder. poor kitty? do your research.
      https://www.google.com/search?q=cats+invasive+species&oq=cats+invas&aqs=chrome.1.69i57j0l5.2955j0j7&sourceid=chrome&espv=210&es_sm=91&ie=UTF-8

    99. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hey guess what, i own a dog and cat and have shot both of those types of animals with a bb gun.
      you just have to make sure it's not at too high a velocity and only shoot the haunches. a bb gun is different than an air rifle.

      granted, also my neighbors are a ways off and would do the same to my pets.

      country living i guess.

    100. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's because you're too lazy to google.

    101. Re: in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, to sum up: You are an antisocial asshole, who is willing to use violence against creatures that neither know nor can appreciate your self-imposed rules when it may not be necessary to deal with minor irritation. Congratulations on being the big man you think you are.

    102. Re:in sue happy america by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 1

      Yeah, tell us more of this nonsense. A shotgun loaded with rocksalt can as easily kill one as it was loaded with lead. So you did it? And you where lucky not to kill anyone? And now you are bragging about it? Wow, impressive ...

      Not even close. It sounds more like he was the target than the shooter to me. I can also tell you first hand that it won't kill you, though it does sting like you wouldn't believe. And he is right, it's a lesson you don't soon forget.

    103. Re:in sue happy america by futuresheep · · Score: 1

      http://downtrend.com/james/washington-town-vigorously-protecting-citizens-from-outdoor-cats/

      I live about 25 miles from there, we have the same laws in my town. I'm glad, I'm got tired of cleaning the cat shit out of my garden that was left by my neighbors cat. A call to the city got a letter sent to the neighbor. Kitty stays indoors now and my garden is cat shit free.

      Here's some cat laws from MA:

      http://www.concordanimals.com/Cat_ByLaws_MA.htm

      Leash and free roaming laws around the country:

      http://www.petwellbeing.com/blog/leash-laws-for-cats

      FWIW, I have a cat. She's perfectly happy to live indoors where she belongs.

    104. Re:in sue happy america by DMUTPeregrine · · Score: 1

      Rock salt (or nastier bacon bits) in a shotgun shell won't penetrate well enough to be lethal, but they'll hurt like hell, and the bacon will fester and infect the wounds if not removed at a hospital. If you just shot a thief or such, then it gives the police a chance to arrest them when they go in for treatment.

      --
      Not a sentence!
    105. Re:in sue happy america by futuresheep · · Score: 1

      http://www.extension.umn.edu/yardandgarden/ygbriefs/h238manure-dog-cat.html "Can pet manure be sterilized chemically to make it safe? There are chemical sterilants such as methyl bromide and others that could be used, but the cost and bother is probably not worth the value of the manure. Also, the average homeowner probably is not equipped to handle chemical sterilants. CONCLUSIONS The health hazards associated with cat and dog manure are greater than the potential benefit from its fertilizer value. Cat and dog manure should be disposed of by flushing down the toilet, burying deep in the soil (six inches or more) or by placement in tight plastic bags for garbage collection. "

    106. Re:in sue happy america by Shakrai · · Score: 0

      Cats are predators.

      Who aren't native to the Northeast United States, where we don't generally appreciate our wildlife being killed by well-fed domestic animals purely for sport. There are a TON of ways to satisfy your cat's hunting instinct without assisting in the destruction of the local wildlife population.

      It's also not your responsibility to keep your cat away from dogs or people, the cat is perfectly capable of doing that itself.

      Tell that to the cats my old dog killed on a regular basis when they were foolish enough to wander into her yard. Bonus points if you try to sue us after your cat dies inside our fenced in yard, like our neighbor did back in the day after the dog bagged three of her cats inside of two weeks. That dog was a cat terminating machine, she killed more than twenty of them over the course of her life, all of them inside of the fence-line. Interestingly enough she never bothered our cats, just the strange ones that were foolish enough to come into her yard.

      One of them got ran over by a car

      Good job failing as a pet owner. Guess how many of my pets have died because of my negligence? Zero.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    107. Re:in sue happy america by Deluvianvortex · · Score: 1

      Except they don't have any evidence he's a thief. But he did just claim that some maniac just shot him with rocksalt after yelling incoherently and he'd like to press charges for assault. Since they don't have a warrant for any of his shit and there's not enough probable cause to get one, who do you think will go to jail first?

    108. Re:in sue happy america by futuresheep · · Score: 2

      Read my post above, many places letting your cat roam and be a nuisance can result in fines and eventually having the cat impounded.

    109. Re:in sue happy america by chromas · · Score: 1

      One garden is not enough.

    110. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One of them died of natural causes outside of the house and we found her body later. One of them got ran over by a car, and the other 4 did not die outside.

      You realize that you just proved her point, right?

    111. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your dog isn't native either chump - bet it never kills any of the local wildlife population.

    112. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you do if its not your animal to begin with. Like, your neighbor went away on a trip and left you the keys to her house, and you forgot to feed the rabbits because they're silent and never make noise. I can totally see someone spacing that. Rabbits are the stupidest animals ever, they aren't like dogs who will make their presence known, they will sit in a single spot like a rock for days because they're literally retarded

    113. Re:in sue happy america by mysidia · · Score: 1

      can't just she go to court for harassment and get rich?

      She should seek statutory damages under the FDCP / FCBA (Fair credit billing act), and unauthorized charges; for the fraudulent report of a $3500 debt for products/services known by the retailer as not delivered.

    114. Re:in sue happy america by mysidia · · Score: 1

      You don't "accidentally forget" to feed an animal in your care for days on end.

      Sure you do... if you're a really really busy, really really bad irresponsible forgetful animal owner, and you have the animal caged up somewhere unusual, that you would only visit specifically to feed the animal.

    115. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      And "where you grew up" they probably strung up people for dating outside their race. That doesn't make it right. Some things have changed for the better.

    116. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know one person that ended up moving over the harassment he got when he shot a neighbors cat.

      Hopefully to the local prison.

    117. Re:in sue happy america by Smallpond · · Score: 1

      anybody can sue anybody for anything. it doesn't mean you'll win, and even if you do your winnings may pale in comparison to your legal costs.

      Once I sued my neighbor because her cat kept defecating in my potted plants. Judge said that I couldn't show any actual monetary damages, so that was the end of that.

      and who says there are too many frivolous lawsuits? If I were the judge I'd have thrown it out because you directed the suit to the wrong target. You should have sued the cat.

    118. Re:in sue happy america by GameMaster · · Score: 1

      Good idea, don't ever admit to it. There's no statute of limitations on that kind of thing.

      --

      Rules of Conduct:
      #1 - The DM is always right.
      #2 - If the DM is wrong, see rule #1
    119. Re:in sue happy america by Holi · · Score: 1

      learned my lesson with lobster pots and I was lucky it was rock salt.

      --
      Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
    120. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who the fuck would shoot a fucking cat with a bb gun? If I were a more violent, less controlled person, I would seriously punch them in their fucking throat. Instead I'm just swearing on the internet.

      (My stray cat that I took in who is AWESOME has a fucking pellet lodged in her side from some sack of shit shooting her. Doc says it'd be worse removing it than leaving it in there).

    121. Re:in sue happy america by Joining+Yet+Again · · Score: 1

      Your jurisdiction's backwardness is noted.

    122. Re:in sue happy america by ShaunC · · Score: 1

      Once I sued my neighbor because her cat kept defecating in my potted plants. Judge said that I couldn't show any actual monetary damages, so that was the end of that.

      Out of sheer curiosity, what if any other remedies did you pursue first? The judge, oddly, was correct: if anything, the cat's feces were "free fertilizer" for you (yes, I agree, that's not how you or I would see it). Without injury or actual damage to property, there isn't really a tort. Animal Control would likely have been a better route.

      --
      Thanks to the War on Drugs, it's easier to buy meth than it is to buy cold medicine!
    123. Re:in sue happy america by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      It's enough for plausible deniability about why there is dirt and a shovel in the bed of your truck.

    124. Re:in sue happy america by Sperbels · · Score: 1

      I've always considered a BB gun an air rifle. So have all my friends and family.

    125. Re: in sue happy america by demonlapin · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The antisocial people are the ones who let their dogs roam wild. I've had two cats in my life that were killed by dogs. Both were in my yard. And I've observed other dogs (also off-leash) chase my cat through my yard. I was a kid for the first one, but on both other occasions I reminded the dog owner that they should consider themselves notified that I felt threatened by their pet, and that failure to follow the leash laws and control a dangerous animal was ample grounds for me to defend myself with deadly force. The second time a pet died, it was the neighbor's dogs who did it. They got out all the time, even menaced my wife in the garage (and she's a lifelong dog owner, knows how to handle them well). After I told her that the next time I saw them in my yard, I would return them in the same condition as my cat, they stopped getting out. That was over five years ago. Zero escapes since then. Amazing how that works.

    126. Re:in sue happy america by rk · · Score: 1

      One of them got ran over by a car

      They are perfectly suited to taking care of themselves.

      Hmmmm.

    127. Re:in sue happy america by roc97007 · · Score: 1

      > You don't "accidentally forget" to feed an animal in your care for days on end.

      Um, yeah, it can happen. A family member is clinically depressed, and she goes through periods where she literally does not know how many days have passed since the last time she fed her pets. (Her pets are supposedly for therapy purposes, but that proved to be a two edged sword.) When one of her pets was found nearly dead due to malnutration, (recovered in a vet's care, but it was a close thing) and it was discovered that all of her pets were malnourished, we had to put a process in place where a responsible person supervised her, reminding her to feed her pets and feeding them during her unresponsive periods.

      The OP probably did not mean a situation exactly like that, but it was the first thing I thought of as I was reading it.

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    128. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your dog isn't native either chump - bet it never kills any of the local wildlife population.

      Wouldn't have to with all the loose cats.

    129. Re:in sue happy america by Black+LED · · Score: 0, Troll

      Wow, you really have some mental problems.

    130. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or they could just be expected to keep the animal on their own damned property... in most places, cats aren't allowed to roam unleashed off your property any more than dogs - it just isn't enforced as much because cats have less of a chance of causing bodily harm (in other words, they're really good at hiding the body).

      Where are cats required to have leashes?

    131. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because, almost without exception, the same uptight assholes who freak out about a neighbor's cat getting into their yard are the first people calling the city zoning department or homeowners' association to complain when those neighbors surround the yard with cat fence ( http://www.catfencein.com/ ) or build a catio ( http://catiodesigns.com/ ) to keep the cats from getting out of the yard.

    132. Re:in sue happy america by kenwd0elq · · Score: 2

      Please! Soak the cat with the garden hose. More effective, less messy, and the water dilutes the urine and breaks down the feces to something more approximating fertilizer.

      In my neighborhood, my wife IS the "crazy cat lady", and this is what I ask all my neighbors to do. End result: the cats stay in MY yard, the neighbors are mostly happy (and take proper satisfaction in their "revenge" when they need to) and no hard feelings. Except the cats, but who are THEY going to complain to?

    133. Re:in sue happy america by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Shooting vermin in Texas is not a crime. You may get a citation (non criminal) for discharging your weapon in city limits, but, so long as you don't shoot across a road, shooting a nuisance animal is legal in Texas.

    134. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really? A person let a rabbit die and you're jumping to "cruelty and malice are the only possible reasons?" I think you need to chill out and realize that sometimes, context is everything. Jumping to conclusions and calling people "dregs of society" without knowing the situation doesn't make you a heroic figure, it makes you a judgmental idiot, who other people might call "dregs of society" in turn.

    135. Re:in sue happy america by Miamicanes · · Score: 2

      > one way to prevent it is to (humanely) catch it and take it to the nearest animal shelter/control where she can pick it up.

      If her cat was vaccinated against FIV and the shelter doesn't have enough cage space to keep him or her in his or her own cage, that little stunt could get the cat killed within minutes of arrival at the shelter... BEFORE they even bother to check for a microchip.

      FIV vaccine should be banned... or at the very least, veterinarians should be required to disclose to cat owners that the cat will test FIV+ for life, and enforce a 24-hour cooling off period to let the owner go home and research the vaccine on his or her own. Seven years ago, I made the terrible mistake of allowing my kitty's vet to cheerfully tell me that there was "a great new vaccine" available. At the time, I knew what FIV was, and was thrilled that there was a new vaccine. She NEVER told me that it would cause him to test FIV+ for the rest of his life, or that the only strains of FIV it worked against were statistically nonexistent in Florida.

    136. Re:in sue happy america by AK+Marc · · Score: 2

      Stopping my cat from assisting in the destruction of the local ecosystem is selfish? Keeping her away from traffic, aggressive dogs, and asshole humans is selfish? Preventing her from getting fleas and ticks is selfish?

      Yes. It is selfish. You want to jail your cat so you know when and how it dies. That's selfish. I've lost a cat. I swear the damn thing waved good-bye before taking off. We never saw it again, but there were many cat homes in the neighborhood, so I expect it shacked up with someone more desirable. My cats have all been outdoor cats. The first that joined the family after me lived to just about 20, as an outdoor cat. Died of AIDS, leukemia, and some other diseases, all hitting at right about the same time (probably got many in his time, and the AIDS let them all out). Sure, he might have lived longer indoors, but he preferred the outdoors.

      By your logic, we should seal all humans in a bubble at birth and never let them out of the bubble, or the house the bubble is in. I'm sure some group would object. You are the type of owner that puts his dog in a kennel "just while they are at work" but in reality the dog is locked up in a tiny jail cell for most of the day, every day "for their own good".

    137. Re:in sue happy america by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Don't bring up antifreeze; that's cruelty to animals and anyone who does that deserves to be poisoned themselves.

      If you want to repel cats, there's lots of effective ways using natural materials, such as hot peppers. There was even a scene in Cool Hand Luke where Paul Newman's character used this trick to deal with some bloodhounds chasing him.

    138. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You people (you and GP poster) are fucking savages. Animal abuse is serious, you are torturing a living thing. I don't care how much you believe God made you in his image, and animals are for your amusement, fuck you.

    139. Re:in sue happy america by lgw · · Score: 1

      So any culture difference from your must be racist and stupid and need changing? Some of us believe in tolerance of other cultures. You might try that sort of thing one day, it frees the mind.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    140. Re:in sue happy america by Loki_1929 · · Score: 1

      (I know one person that ended up moving over the harassment he got when he shot a neighbors cat. Also, every potted plant and his entire lawn died. It's assumed that one or more persons put herbicide on all of them.)

      Sounds like your friend decided to back down. Another option would have been to simply take the necessary steps to ensure that the sanctity and security of his home were no longer violated by either neighbors or their unwelcome animals.

      Step 1: Surround the house with 5,000-lumen security lights - http://www.amazon.com/Whelen-Super-LED-Floodlight-5000-Lumens/dp/B004HL5W7Y
      Step 2: Install motion sensors near the house connected to 105dB sirens - http://simplisafe.com/105-decibel-alarm-siren
      Step 3: Utilize ArduCopter HEXA at high altitude to deliver daily 3.3lb payload of salt to enemy neighbors' yards - http://www.canadadrones.com/ArduCopter-Hexa-KIT-HEAVY-LIFT-Full-Electronics-p/ac-hexa-kit-full-hl1.htm
      Step 4: Sue to tear out all boundary trees in enemy neighbors' yards
      Step 5: Replace your potted plants with well fertilized plants all along the property line (ensuring to-the-letter compliance with local/HOA requirements)
      Step 6: Operate multiple wireless routers (properly secured of course) at all frequencies and channels as close to enemy neighbors' houses as possible

      A few weeks or months of being sleep deprived, blind, and deaf, losing their trees, watching every other form of plant life in their yard slowly die, smelling the shit-smell gently wafting over from your new plants, and being completely unable to maintain a functional wireless device, they'll either surrender or move (i.e. surrender). That or they'll be driven to do something terribly illegal which will land them in jail.

      --
      -- "Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
    141. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My pellet gun says explicitly on it "FOR HUNTING ONLY." I doubt it would simply remove an eye. I only use it for target practice (breaking the hunting only rule), but I'd never aim it at anything alive or in a direction where anything alive could be beyond my target. Modern BB/pellet guns aren't anything to sneeze at. And they aren't a good solution for cat repellant!

    142. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      cruelty to animals is often a precursor to crimes against humans

      Something like 97% of violent criminals also breathe air before they start criming.

    143. Re:in sue happy america by khellendros1984 · · Score: 1

      Depends on if the BB gun uses air to propel the projectile. If it's just a spring, then "air rifle" is a bit of a misnomer, isn't it?

      --
      It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    144. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      BB gun == air fifle.

      BB gun != air-soft

      Fuck you.

    145. Re:in sue happy america by DMUTPeregrine · · Score: 1

      It depends on whether one is in Texas or not.

      --
      Not a sentence!
    146. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Once I sued my neighbor because her cat kept defecating in my potted plants

      you'd be amazed how many problems a BB gun will solve.

      Or ANY gun for that matter. 9mm rounds are cheap.

    147. Re:in sue happy america by BlueStrat · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Where I grew up, shooting a kid with a shotgun (loaded with rock salt) was considered an object lesson about property rights, and we'd have been shocked if anyone went to jail for it. How times have changed.

      I remember at 12-13 yo in the mid-'70s, the family lived for a time (father in civil service-transfers were fast-track grade advancement) in south-central MS near the eastern MS/western AL border. There was this old farmer that raised huge patches of watermelons and strawberries that all the kids knew would shoot at you with this old break-action double-barrel 12ga loaded with rock-salt shells (though he couldn't see at distance worth beans) if he spotted you in his fields (and sometimes actually grazed the occasional slow/careless kid with a piece or two, usually one kid a season).

      Everybody in the surrounding area knew this and him, including the police & sheriff. That was the way things had been for as long as many if not most who lived there could remember, even as they were kids.

      Nobody even thought to call the police. They'd have simply told you that "...you ought-not to be a-trespassin' on no private prop-perty. Ev'rbody know the ol' man'll light bee-hines wit rocksalt if'n he catches ya in is fields! Ya'll'll get hurt ya keep it up, an' if we gotsta carry ya'll to the horsepital, we'd be 'bliged to charge ya'll wit trespass." (there *were* signs).

      The old boy sat in a rocking chair on his porch and typically never even stood to shoot. The range was like anywhere from 60 to 100-plus yards. He also loaded these shells of his really light on powder charge. If you had on jeans all you'd get is a nice welt if you were closer.

      The only two times I remember any blood having been drawn or any skin penetration or other injury (other than self-inflicted) occurring was when the two kids in question didn't pay attention, had gotten far too close, and were wearing shorts. Only one small piece barely penetrated skin both times, though from the way they'd each screamed at the time, I'm sure it burned like hell.

      The first "strawberry-heart" medal-winner popped out the little salt fragment with his own thumbnails, wiped it hydrogen peroxide, stuck a band-aid on it, and carried on. Next season, the other medal-winner's piece of salt was so small it had dissolved before the kid had stopped running, and left but a single drop of blood, a welt, and a painful memory.

      I was always careful to stay at the edge of his range, kept real low, and never stayed long or ate/took very much on the occasions I was pressured to join in. We didn't hurt the old man's harvest. He had these huge fields, but a lot of what grew he never picked and it rotted in the fields.

      I do "distinctly* remember what the sound of rock salt sounds like whizzing around/past you from a 12ga, some making weird "ricochet"-type whining, moaning, or buzzing sounds, striking vegetation around you, etc.

      Nothing like it to get those legs really moving!

      It's downright motuh-VAY-shunul! :D

      CoD!?!? Bah! Back in *my* day, we went out unarmed and deliberately got shot at with *real* guns just for *fun*!!! :D

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    148. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Texas is a backwards state filled with gun nut redneck rubes, of course they live like barbarians.

    149. Re:in sue happy america by Dan541 · · Score: 0

      If your cat came into my yard to attack other animals, I'd shoot it.

      If I saw you cat out hunting native fauna I'd shoot it.

      Quit being an irresponsible moron.

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
    150. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree. I think anti-freeze is probably a felony in some places.

      I would imagine the woman can sue over emotional stress caused by this. But I think that would have to lead to monetary loss, such as perhaps missing some work, maybe seeing a psychaitrist, etc.

      I am not a lawyer.

    151. Re:in sue happy america by betterprimate · · Score: 1

      Often times cats are attracted by another's scent. You can neutralize it with white vinegar.

    152. Re:in sue happy america by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Yes, but that doesn't change the fact that GP's legal opinion is demonstrably wrong.

    153. Re:in sue happy america by aevan · · Score: 1

      Well...my google search history just got another stack of 'wtf'.. but apparently high metabolism/small size has the lil buggers dying within only a few days, and digestive issues within 12 hours. So figure a weekend trip/party, a failed assumption you stocked the pet with food before you left, and you return 4 days later to bunny corpse.

    154. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you did your due diligence to prevent your pet from damaging other's propriety? No. You let them roamed free and you are therefore liable.

      Not 'allowing' your kids to break window doesn't make you less responsible if you kids break the neighbour window. They are your kids, you pay for the damage. Therefore It's your pet, you pay for the damage. Just keep your pet on a leash or keep them inside. My cat stay inside and remain safe and does not damage propriety or kill other people's pets.

      When a animal, wild or domesticated, damage my garden I set a cage trap and free it far away. If that was your cat, that mean you lose your cat.. but you may eventually retrieve it if it was properly registered and had identifier. Although, if the damage are important, you may get sue if your cat was registered and tagged. Which explain why most peoples dose not register or identify their pet. Their lost...

    155. Re:in sue happy america by TheMeuge · · Score: 1

      Actually if you shoot someone with rock salt, you are likely to be arrested and prosecuted for assault... even in Texas... because you are telling the police in no uncertain terms, that you did not feel that you were in any danger. And they'd be right. Don't ever point a weapon at someone unless you want to kill them, intend to kill them, and are going to kill them (hopefully all of the above are solely for the reason of defending yourself or someone else).

    156. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Read his link.

      Hotlinked for your convenience

      He is using a Raspberry Pi linked to a camera to watch the potted plant and spray the offending cat with a stream of water..

      I would have moderated him informative but I am fresh out of mod points, so I will comment anonymously instead.

      My solution to this same problem involved a little PIR detector, a CCFL inverter module, and a 12V gel cell. Worked great. Cat never came back. Did not really hurt the cat, but it never showed interest in spraying in my barbeque again.

    157. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Around my neck of the woods, "stray" cats are trapped and surrendered to the local animal shelter, where the owner has to pay around $100 to bail them out.

      There is considerable effort to have animals "chipped" so the owner can be located for payment and obligation to reclaim the animal.

      A few bouts of this can get really expensive for the animal owner.

    158. Re:in sue happy america by F.Ultra · · Score: 1

      Still AFAIK if you pillage and rape in another country then that country will have to have you extradited so _they_ can charge you for those crimes.

    159. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    160. Re:in sue happy america by matfud · · Score: 1

      Cats do not do that. Oddly they do not understand property laws. They do understand their own laws.

      http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22567526

    161. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      BB guns use springs. You're lucky if you can break paper at ten feet.

    162. Re:in sue happy america by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      Perhaps you should reconsider the quality of the people you associate with. Just sayin'

      One of them is related to my best friend. It's not like I hang around with them. But I have spent enough time around them to know that they are not malicious or evil. They are trying to do the right thing. They are just young and make a lot of dumb mistakes.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    163. Re:in sue happy america by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      In this case, the animal was not in a cage. it was in a corral, which had grass in it. Apparently since the rabbit was domesticated, it didn't realize it could eat the grass, or maybe it didn't like the grass. The really amazing part is that the neighbor (who filed the charges) testified that she noted that the rabbit was not getting fed, and yet she didn't actually do anything about it either. The food was not under lock and key. I think the neighbor ought to get part of the blame as well. But my understanding is that she made a deal with the prosecution. In exchange for her testimony, she wouldn't be charged. I can't believe that that is legal.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    164. Re:in sue happy america by Karzz1 · · Score: 1

      Switch out "rabbit" for "child". See if that clears it up for you. I am not saying a rabbit's life is equal to that of a child. Hell, I eat rabbits; but they were not tortured before I ate them.

      --
      Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master.
    165. Re:in sue happy america by Karzz1 · · Score: 1

      In the situation you describe, I agree 100% the neighbor shares the blame. Honestly I don't know how people sleep at night. And this being said by a person who eats wild game, fishes regularly and even enjoys rabbit on occasion.

      --
      Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master.
    166. Re:in sue happy america by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Maybe, but I doubt that's the case here: cats are attracted to spots where the dirt is soft and it's easy to dig and deposit their turds. It's the same reason that indoor cats will happily use a litter box instead of pooping all over your house. Potted plants and flower beds have nice, soft, diggable dirt, unlike most other places in someone's yard.

      The solution is some kind of cat repellent. Some kind of pepper powder might work, and I'm sure there's other commercial purpose-made repellents available as well. I've seen some made more for deer and other animals; they'd probably work for cats too.

    167. Re:in sue happy america by eneville · · Score: 1

      anybody can sue anybody for anything. it doesn't mean you'll win, and even if you do your winnings may pale in comparison to your legal costs.

      Once I sued my neighbor because her cat kept defecating in my potted plants. Judge said that I couldn't show any actual monetary damages, so that was the end of that.

      You can always solve this problem with technology: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uIbkLjjlMV8

    168. Re:in sue happy america by matfud · · Score: 1

      Yep they are evil. Who does not want the entrails from something left as a gift.

    169. Re:in sue happy america by matfud · · Score: 1

      Not the US as military personnel can not be extradited.
      No matter what the crime is they can not be extradited.

    170. Re:in sue happy america by stoatwblr · · Score: 1

      "There's a ton of effective ways to keep cats out of your yard,"

      If all you want to do is stop 'em crapping in your plants, chili flakes work wonders.

    171. Re:in sue happy america by Cederic · · Score: 1

      Where I live cats are legally acknowledged to be wild animals in their territorial habits and lack of respect for artificial human rules. Basically cats have the right to roam and your human property rights mean fuck all to the cat - and therefore fuck all if you try and apply them to it.

      They're also protected from harm.

      Someone traps my cat and sends it to a shelter, I'll request that I get it back. The shelter tries to charge me for it and there'll be serious trouble.

      (Sadly this means I'm unable to legally kill/maim the evil cat that lives across the road. This is the only reason it's still alive; the evil cat is the reason I now have only three cats, not four.)

    172. Re:in sue happy america by Cederic · · Score: 1

      His cat getting run over by a car is not negligence on his part. It's a cat getting run over by a fucking car.

      The RSPCA where I live refuse to give rescue cats to people that wont let them outside. Google the RSPCA and tell me you're more expert on cat care than them, because I don't think you are.

    173. Re:in sue happy america by F.Ultra · · Score: 1

      Yes that is well know :) but still regarding your original claim that my country historically had included the right to pillage and rape in other countries, I would still say that this is probably legal in most countries.

      Just look at Assange for example, Sweden wants him extradited for Rape-charges but I have a hard time seeing that Australia would prosecute him for performing rape in another country which in essence makes it legal for Australians to rape (and possible pillage) in other countries.

    174. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wait, are you denying that lynching black people is racist and that it should be accepted? Wow.

    175. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A little tip: letting your cat roam outside is not against the law.

    176. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, I agree. Texas is like what would happen if Captain Kirk or Picard were to violate the prime directive and arm a primitive society with weapons that are too advanced for them. They go power crazy and shoot everything as a first resort.

    177. Re:in sue happy america by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      I would say it depends on the distance ... when I hear/read shotgun I always think about close combat.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    178. Re:in sue happy america by noh8rz10 · · Score: 1

      Someone traps my cat and sends it to a shelter, I'll request that I get it back. The shelter tries to charge me for it and there'll be serious trouble.

      what do you mean by this? you would be mad at the shelter for charging you money? it makes sense to me, they have a lot of expenses. You would be mad at your neighbor for trapping your cat on his or her property, then taking it to a shelter? Or if it happened, but you got the cat for no money, you wouldn't be mad at your neighbor any more?

      I'm trying to understand but need more info.

    179. Re:in sue happy america by noh8rz10 · · Score: 1

      or they could sue for harassment...

    180. Re:in sue happy america by noh8rz10 · · Score: 1

      tbh i just kind of went straight to suing... it worked pretty well for me before when a different neighbor had an overhanging fruit tree. I figured why the heck not?

    181. Re:in sue happy america by Loki_1929 · · Score: 1

      The salt? Maybe. If you can even prove it's happening and can prove who's responsible for it. Everything else? If people are entering your property without your permission and destroying your property, I'd say you have every reason to install legitimate security equipment to stop that.

      --
      -- "Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
    182. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I'd like to point out that this is now literally a get off my lawn thread.

    183. Re: in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're comparing murdering a human to murdering a rabbit. Pretty substantial difference fucktard.

    184. Re: in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everybody knows you should at least use a .22

    185. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Interesting how you say "Rescued one of the neighborhood strays"

      Rescued from what ?

      Arrogant "property owners" who will do harm to animals which, in THIER opinion have no
      business roaming around on "their rightfully owned property" ?

      Rescued from the SPCA, a human supremacy agency which goes around, rounding up anything that's not human and then killing them ? i.e. if they refuse to be imprisoned by one of the supreme humans ?

    186. Re:in sue happy america by noh8rz10 · · Score: 2

      yeah but judges and juries aren't stupid. they know the difference between "somebody securing his/her premesis" and "somebody being a jerk to annoy his/her neighbors." they're likely to say "knock it off"

    187. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      She let a rabbit *starve* to death. Think about that for a minute. You don't "accidentally forget" to feed an animal in your care for days on end. That is animal abuse plain and simple and would also fall into the category of torture. Both of these are (low-level) felonies in all states to the best of my knowledge.

      To be honest, both of these people sound like the dregs of society and not anyone I would want to admit associating with.

      To be honest, I don't think your final statement was very honest.

    188. Re:in sue happy america by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      Children tend to make their hunger known before they starve to death. They're a bit harder to kill than houseplants and rabbits. ;)

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    189. Re:in sue happy america by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So your saying anyone with different values than you must also lynch black people? Wow.

    190. Re:in sue happy america by Neil+Boekend · · Score: 1

      The neighbor owned the cat. The neighbor should have taught the cat not to leave their property, installed a incentive for the cat not to leave the property (electric fence works wonders) or kept the cat inside if it goes into other people's gardens.
      If someone claims that that is cruel to cats this just means they know cats are not suitable as pets.
      If my dog decides to go to the neighbor's garden I have a duty to teach it not to (or to prevent it from doing so. This also works as teaching) unless the neighbor specifically states that it isn't a problem.

      --
      Well, I might have a way, but it only works on a semi spherical planet in a vacuum.
    191. Re:in sue happy america by Neil+Boekend · · Score: 1

      Do I understand that you didn't first talk to the neighbor?

      --
      Well, I might have a way, but it only works on a semi spherical planet in a vacuum.
    192. Re:in sue happy america by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      I like how you talk about how it's humane to keep a cat inside while mentioning that your dog, which is not native to your area and which you keep outside, kills all the cats. Sounds like you should keep your dog inside if you care about animal welfare.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    193. Re:in sue happy america by ArbitraryName · · Score: 1
    194. Re:in sue happy america by ArbitraryName · · Score: 1
    195. Re:in sue happy america by Raenex · · Score: 1

      The really amazing part is that the neighbor (who filed the charges) testified that she noted that the rabbit was not getting fed, and yet she didn't actually do anything about it either. The food was not under lock and key.

      For that matter, she could have just thrown the poor thing a carrot.

    196. Re:in sue happy america by Whorhay · · Score: 1

      Meh, I'd just live catch trap every cat you can, remove any collars or other identifiers and then drop them off at a nice kill shelter in a neighboring county.

  4. Hello Streisand Effect by rossz · · Score: 5, Funny

    kleargear will soon discover how the internet works.

    --
    -- Will program for bandwidth
    1. Re:Hello Streisand Effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      They already are. They're removing all comments from their facebook page.

    2. Re:Hello Streisand Effect by TubeSteak · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Really they should discover how their State's Attorney General works.
      I'm a strong advocate for Corporate Death Sentences and banning corporate officers from owning or running another corporation for X years.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    3. Re:Hello Streisand Effect by leereyno · · Score: 2

      Too bad that idea can't be applied to government(s) and the kleptocrats who corrupt it.

      --
      Muslim community leaders warn of backlash from tomorrow morning's terrorist attack.
    4. Re:Hello Streisand Effect by kermyt · · Score: 5, Informative

      And now they have disallowed all commants on their FB page.

    5. Re:Hello Streisand Effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      DM;GA "doesn't matter; got advertising"

      This advertising stunt is worth millions to the company in question.

      (Hint: In a year or two, you won't remember this event; you'll only remember that you know the name of the company. Business plan: piss a couple of people off enough to make national news; reap MASSIVE profits by letting news agencies give you free advertising.)

    6. Re:Hello Streisand Effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't need to remember the event. Google will remember it for me and it'll show up as the second or third result when you search for the company name, unless they do something even more embarrassing in the interim. Hell, I bet it'll show up in the autocomplete right in the search box.

    7. Re:Hello Streisand Effect by Fjandr · · Score: 4, Funny

      Indeed. I'd like to see some corporate death sentences handed down.

    8. Re:Hello Streisand Effect by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 2

      Why not just simplify things with corporate death sentences and death sentences for corporate officers? So much less paperwork and risk of 'silent partner' activity.

    9. Re:Hello Streisand Effect by ElectricTurtle · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that worked out really well for 'Ocean Marketing'. You might remember the name, but you sure as hell aren't going to get anything from them, since they collapsed under the wave of antipathy.

      --
      I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
    10. Re:Hello Streisand Effect by mythosaz · · Score: 1

      I guess it's time to comment on their photos :)

    11. Re:Hello Streisand Effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's the fundamental reason for the 2nd amendment.

    12. Re:Hello Streisand Effect by newcastlejon · · Score: 1

      (Hint: In a year or two, you won't remember this event; you'll only remember that you know the name of the company. Business plan: piss a couple of people off enough to make national news; reap MASSIVE profits by letting news agencies give you free advertising.)

      Really? I'm barely halfway down the page and I've already forgotten. That sort of trick only works the first time; as it is this is just another in a long line of 'company tries to bully customer with the courts' stories.

      --
      If God forks the Universe every time you roll a die, he'd better have a damned good memory.
    13. Re:Hello Streisand Effect by hey! · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This is always *my* reaction. In my state, you don't have to hire a lawyer most of the time for this kind of thing. You call the state AG's consumer protection office and they contact the firm that's harassing you. Once they (or their lawyers, or assignees or whatever) find out you don't have to hire a lawyer yourself, they back off fast. Their game is picking on people who can't defend themselves.

      If your state doesn't work this way, then you should elect a different state government.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    14. Re:Hello Streisand Effect by techno-vampire · · Score: 1

      Really they should discover how their State's Attorney General works.

      Either that, or the Feds if the company's in a different state. And, the proper charge isn't harassment, it's extortion.

      --
      Good, inexpensive web hosting
    15. Re:Hello Streisand Effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      But not their posts.

      Hundreds of negative things here, but instead of one-word posts, the clause should be posted.

      BUYER BEWARE
      In an effort to ensure fair and honest public feedback, and to prevent the publishing of libelous content in any form, your acceptance of this sales contract prohibits you from taking any action that negatively impacts KlearGear.com, its reputation, products, services, management or employees.

      Should you violate this clause, as determined by KlearGear.com in its sole discretion, you will be provided a seventy-two (72) hour opportunity to retract the content in question. If the content remains, in whole or in part, you will immediately be billed $3,500.00 USD for legal fees and court costs until such complete costs are determined in litigation. Should these charges remain unpaid for 30 calendar days from the billing date, your unpaid invoice will be forwarded to our third party collection firm and will be reported to consumer credit reporting agencies until paid.

    16. Re:Hello Streisand Effect by hey! · · Score: 2

      Actually, that's the fundamental reason for *elections*.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    17. Re:Hello Streisand Effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      And now their FB page has been deleted.

    18. Re:Hello Streisand Effect by mrbester · · Score: 1

      There's also defamation of character by the reporting to credit agencies to basically fuck them over. Oh, and fraud.

      --
      "Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
    19. Re:Hello Streisand Effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is their FB page down now? I was able to get there a few hours ago, now the same direct link I took earlier is now taking me to my default FB page.

    20. Re:Hello Streisand Effect by mysidia · · Score: 2

      They already are. They're removing all comments from their facebook page.

      This is one of the reasons Facebook sucks. Companies can remove "unflattering" comments from their page, and leave only the likes and flattering ones.

      It erodes trust.... You can't look at a company's FB page, and see it as anything but marketing.

    21. Re:Hello Streisand Effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since it's such a valuable page, and it's a shame to see it go dark - I resurrected it :)

    22. Re:Hello Streisand Effect by cdl · · Score: 1

      And their phone number is now disco'd as well. Wonder how their inbox looks...

    23. Re:Hello Streisand Effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And now, they took the page down too. I'm sure it'll be back up next week though, once everything blows over.

    24. Re:Hello Streisand Effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      https://www.facebook.com/pages/Kleargear/175099796030440 And for those who are interested e-mail kleargear@reallymymail.com username anona.moose.902 password nsawashere Have fun...

    25. Re:Hello Streisand Effect by Cordus+Mortain · · Score: 1

      This could work both ways. An opportunity to give honest and open feedback, and makes public offers to (for example) reimburse a customer if there's a problem. Unfortunately too many companies are about making a quick buck.

    26. Re:Hello Streisand Effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      kleargear will soon discover how the internet works.

      I had never previously heard of kleargear, but now I know to avoid them at all costs!

    27. Re:Hello Streisand Effect by TubeSteak · · Score: 2

      In my state, you don't have to hire a lawyer most of the time for this kind of thing. You call the state AG's consumer protection office and they contact the firm that's harassing you. Once they (or their lawyers, or assignees or whatever) find out you don't have to hire a lawyer yourself, they back off fast.

      I don't want them to "back off," I want their cancerous behaviors to be permanently excised from the public sphere:
      1. Corporate charters revoked (aka the death penalty)
      2. Civil enforcement actions banning the officers from holding any similar position.
      3. State Bar Associations revoking the licenses of any lawyers involved in the shitbaggery.

      "But that's anti-business"
      1. Only insomuch as those businesses are anti-me.
      2. The same thing was said about 40 hour work weeks, child labor laws, and every other meaningful regulation over the last 100 years.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    28. Re:Hello Streisand Effect by s.petry · · Score: 1

      If it was possible to spin it into a positive, you would be correct. The problem here is that there is no way to spin this in a positive way and the company is not big enough to pay PR firms to try and fix it.

      The company can not bill her $3,500.00 for starters. Claiming breach of contract in this case simply won't work for the company. The person did not sign a legal contract with such an asinine clause. Even if the person signed without noticing the clause, it's not a binding contract for dozens of reasons. A judge would simply throw the company and the contract out, and a good judge would recommend the defendant sue the plaintiff.

      Since this company is small, they really just put themselves out of business. The owner should have checked with a lawyer before trying to do something this idiotic.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    29. Re:Hello Streisand Effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Not a binding agreement. This would fail on the grounds that this is a Deceptive Trade Practice as defined in the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act. Such a clause constitutes an automatic violation of that law as it's a form an attempt to get you to waive your rights under the same. I don't think they want to get the AG after them on this. He's got the authority to go after you if you've done business in Texas, even if you're in another State- as does all AG's on this sort of thing.

    30. Re:Hello Streisand Effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you believe that this worked in the last election, I've got some nice "dry" land on the middle of the Florida coastline to sell you...only a few gators...promise...

    31. Re:Hello Streisand Effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kleargear.com Is owned by Chenal Media, owned by Will Bermender.

    32. Re:Hello Streisand Effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shit has hit the fan.

    33. Re:Hello Streisand Effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Too bad that idea can't be applied to government(s) and the kleptocrats who corrupt it.

      It already has been applied for centuries. Ever heard of elections?

    34. Re:Hello Streisand Effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So if the law and legal system is used to bully people who can not afford to hire lawyers, I see no moral oblicagtion to obey the law. Back in the days of 'street justice' you did not go to court, you knew what was right and settled things the manly way. Of coarse this system got abused and you had mobs, so the legal system and laws were developed. Unfortunately the pendulum has swung too far far toward the legal system that lawyers are nothing more than criminals who prey on the poor. The courts always protect the rich. So it is time to man up and settle things the old fashioned way with fists of justice.

      Society swings back and fourth. First one side gets corrupted, and the favor goes to the other side and then that side gets corrupted, and things return to what they once were, and the cycle repeats.

      When wise people decided to create the court and legal system to protect the weak and indigent from the whims of the strong they never thought of what it would become today. Today it is doing the exactly the thing it was created to prevent. So it is time for the strong to protect the weak and indigent from the law. Only faggots settle things in court. If you know something is right you should stand up for it, regardless of the corrupt law.

    35. Re:Hello Streisand Effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll bet KlearGear now regrets their heavy handed tactics. I also noticed in reading the archived web page that they reserved the right to charge a $50 fee if you initiated a credit card chargeback against them without waiting 30 days for them to address your issue, which in practice means you have to pay your credit card bill for something you didn't receive because you have to wait a whole billing cycle before you can initiate a charge back. I used to work in the credit card business and I think that rule is actually in violation of the merchant agreement they would have had to sign with their bank. Bottom line, anyone who reads about this and still does business with them deserves whatever happens to them.

  5. Diligent Efforts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    All this diligent effort to quash her negative review or help them avoid supposed fines - too bad none of that effort couldn't be put to satisfying the customer in the first place or correct their mistake.

    1. Re:Diligent Efforts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      She wasn't even their customer. Her husband tried to make the purchase, not her. Therefore, why should any "Terms of sale" clause they have apply to her anyway?

  6. Hint taken. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Never ever buy anything from kleargear.com. They might ruin your credit for it.

    In fact... lets just pop that right into the hosts file right now. Just in case i forget.

    Just another shady fly by nite rip off site. Lets get this woman some donations so she can sue the shit out of them.

    1. Re:Hint taken. by mark-t · · Score: 0

      This kind of fine cannot ruin your credit score, even if it actually went to a collection agency.

    2. Re:Hint taken. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're assuming collection agencies and credit reporting agencies are competent or care about anything except money. With either one, you claim someone owes you, they'll happily take it. Credit reporting agencies will happily add it to your report (good luck actually getting it removed). Collection agencies will harass you until your lawyer writes to them.

    3. Re:Hint taken. by tibit · · Score: 1

      LOLWUT? Any collection effort is an instant drop from say 800 to 750. If it drags on, you'll easily go below 700. For much less than $3500.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    4. Re:Hint taken. by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      Shouldn't credit fraud be a jailable offense? Considering the effect it can have on another human being, it ought to have some serious repercussions.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    5. Re:Hint taken. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      lets just pop that right into the hosts file right now

      Whoa, hey! Keep your voice down!

    6. Re:Hint taken. by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Where I come from a fine is imposed by a court after a criminal trial, and it's owed to the government.

      Is a corporation in the US simply allowed to say "you owe me X dollars because ya-boo", and it actually has legal significance?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    7. Re:Hint taken. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      like hell it can't.

      since that kleargear fine hit our (actually, it was my husband's report, not mine) credit, we've been consistently denied for various financing... incluing trying to get our furance replaced when it died on us last month. we had to get a second car for my husband's new job, and it took them a month to find a bank willing to finance us all because of this bullshit charge on our credit.

    8. Re:Hint taken. by hilljere · · Score: 1

      That is correct, it's significant in that they can ruin your credit without any proof. If they want to do anything else they would need proof in court.

    9. Re:Hint taken. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aaaand this is why I give absolutely no fucks about the arbitrary number assigned to me by the banking cartels that I'm supposed to toil to get as high as possible so the banks will think I'm a good person. Fuck you and anyone who gives a fuck about a useless, made-up fairytale number.

    10. Re:Hint taken. by bobbied · · Score: 1

      As soon as it hits your credit report, you run down to the nearest lawyer and threaten to sue for defamation. The lawyer will likely take it on commission so it won't cost you a dime out of pocket. I'm just guessing that most companies will quickly drop the collection attempt and settle out of court because they are going to loose this one.

      Getting the report removed might take a bit of work though. You are going to have to challenge the report at all the reporting agencies after you get their settlement.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    11. Re:Hint taken. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Legal significance? Not really. Financial significance? Yes.

      That's not how credit scores work.

      Private reporting agencies come up with a score formula.

      The reporting agency obtains data from a variety of sources. Those sources include collection agencies and other companies such as kleargear.
      The formula is applied to the data. The collection reported by the collection agency or by kleargear is part of that data. The formula produces a lower number with the collection than it would have without it.

      That's your score.
      Then another private business buys that score from the credit bureau. They then decide to deny you credit or charge you a higher interest rate because the score is low.

      There is no governmental involvement at all *.

      * The government regulations do state that reporting agencies must disclose the score to you under certain circumstances and must provide some information about the main derogatory elements of the score. The government does not, however, provide the score and normally doesn't take any action against you because of it.

    12. Re:Hint taken. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep. They sure can.

      Even a small little ding from a nothing company like this is enough to cost you thousands from higher interest rates for something like your home loan etc...

      That's why it's important to stomp the crap out of businesses who get caught doing this. Both stomped by the law and all consumers.

      If i had my way this company would be shut down. And all assets seized. Corporate death penalty for malicious fraud.

    13. Re:Hint taken. by tibit · · Score: 1

      Good for you to have enough savings to buy a house, or even a car.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    14. Re:Hint taken. by bobbied · · Score: 1

      It's a civil issue not criminal. But you can sue for defamation if you are reported to be in collections for a debt after you notify them that the debt is not valid.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    15. Re:Hint taken. by lgw · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Making a false report to a credit agency runs into laws with real teeth. It's one of the few places where you're personally and criminally liable for how you do business, even if you work for a big corporation.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    16. Re:Hint taken. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In th US you can sue any company fraudulently and wilfully damaging your credit for 3 times the amount of any loan that was denied. With certain caveats. Get a lawyer.

    17. Re:Hint taken. by mark-t · · Score: 1

      Sure... but as soon as they find out that the claim was not justified, the black mark is removed. An arbitrary party can't just go and ruin somebody's credit score simply by saying that they didn't pay for permission to say bad things about them (which is basically what this fine is).

    18. Re:Hint taken. by almitydave · · Score: 1

      I hear that if you go into the boys' room, close your eyes, turn around 3 times while saying "Hosts file" each time, when you open your eyes and look in the mirror, "127.0.0.1" will be written across your forehead in blood, and a randomly-bolded and italicized screed will appear all over the walls.

      --
      my, your, his/her/its, our, your, their
      I'm, you're, he's/she's/it's, we're, you're, they're
    19. Re:Hint taken. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As far as I know, you don't (normally) even know you have a mark against you. Don't you have to use one of those credit reporting agencies to even access this information? Unless you pay for access to your own information, you might not even know there is a problem.

    20. Re:Hint taken. by TapeCutter · · Score: 2

      Credit agencies do not simply whack whatever Joe Website tells them in their database, such a database would be fucking useless to its other customers and they would end up taking their business to a less naïve agency. All the legal/marketing bullshit in the world will not save an agency trying to sell a worthless service.

      Having said that, if you think like a loser you will be treated like one, grow a pair and stand up to the hollow threats of corner-shop bullies. It's easier than you think because (shock, horror) the credit agencies are looking out for the credit agency, and the way they do that is by providing accurate reports to their clients. Up/downgrading your rating on rumour and hearsay is simply not profitable for the agency because in the same way a commercial lender doesn't want to loan money to people who can't pay, they also don't want to erroneously reject a loan that the customer could comfortably service.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    21. Re:Hint taken. by systemeng · · Score: 3, Informative

      The Federal Law also allows state attorneys general to file suit on behalf of tax papyers in credit reporting cases. A local lawn care service accidentally submitted an already paid bill of mine to a collections agency. The Alabama Attorney General's Office was not amused and forced them to write a letter explaining themselves to me and then suggested that I sue the company which by then had seen the error in their ways.

    22. Re:Hint taken. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is a corporation in the US simply allowed to say "you owe me X dollars because ya-boo", and it actually has legal significance?

      Of course not. They can, however make up an invoice that says you owe them X dollars because ya-boo, and hand it off to a collection agency. The collection agency is not required to evaluate whether it's a legitimate invoice. Some collection agencies have reputations for being doggedly annoying in hopes of getting a few dollars. Some of them have even been know to violate regulations and laws.

      There is no aspect of this which is anything other than extortion, and a sensible woman would report it as such to her local police or state AG

    23. Re:Hint taken. by FunPika · · Score: 1

      According to TFA, these people have in fact been getting declined on loans and similar stuff because of this.

      --
      After years of not using a signature, I am going to make one to say the following: Fuck Beta
    24. Re:Hint taken. by mark-t · · Score: 1

      Which is wrong... and the agency that fraudulently impacted their credit is legally culpable and could be sued for a rather large amount.

      Oh, and once the matter goes before a tribunal to arbitrate the dispute, the black mark can be completely erased.

    25. Re:Hint taken. by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Nope, defamation is a "public" harm. That someone mis-uses a credit entry on a report won't help you. The actual harm is caused by the credit report, and the banking lobby has paid off enough politicians to indemnify them. They have rules that if they follow explicitly protect them from all harm, and if they don't follow them, you still have zero chance of winning anything from them. I've had a 10+ year old debt show up (waited so long because it was invalid) and it was "new" because it was just added. It shouldn't be able to be on my credit report after 7 years past the bad debt, regardless of when it was reported. But no, they wouldn't verify it, remove it, or even let me comment it, as they are "required by law" to do. I was told that it would be cheaper to pay them off than sue it off, and that's almost always the case (which is another reason they do what the do). Repeal all those protections on reporting agencies, and most of the problem would go away.

    26. Re:Hint taken. by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Ha ha, you are wrong. I've had my mother in law place a lien against my house because she didn't like that I was moving away (I sent her notice I was suing her, as required by small claims court, and she took it off, but I'd have had to sue to get it off). And I've had a (not real) bad debt show up on my credit report, and I spent many hours fighting it, only to eventually have my lawyer tell me that it's cheaper to pay it than fight it in court (so I ignored it, and it never did me any harm).

    27. Re:Hint taken. by AK+Marc · · Score: 2

      I just moved. I live in a country that doesn't allow the horrible reporting cartels. There is no "credit score" here. I used to get my creadit report every chance I could (for free) - once a year plus every time I was denied credit (you can trigger that by applying for a card with information that conflicts the report, then you get a free look at the report, for a cost of about 10 points for having another recent credit check against it). Having an active dispute against me didn't seem to hurt the score much. I was much worse off with a $100 outstanding debt from a utility (they mark their bills to not be forwarded, and so when I moved, the final bill didn't make it to me, and in the hubbub, I thought I was even with the last one I paid). I paid that off, and the next year, back to near-pristine.

      There's no such thing as a person who can't get credit, there's just an issue of how much it costs them, and the fine print in the contract. Such as the rent-to-own used car dealership that charges about twice what the car is worth, and owns it 100% until the last payment is made (as the owner, when you get behind in payments, they can repossess without a court order or any oversight or regulations)

    28. Re:Hint taken. by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      No, you really can't. They are require to "validate" the debt, which consists of a single call or email to the claimant asking whether it's valid. The answer is always yes, as there are no repercussions for anyone. I've had an invalid debt "validated". And defamation doesn't work. They didn't defame you. They passed on information in their possession that's factual. Whether the bank takes that as positive or negative when you apply for a loan is the bank's business, not theirs. They have lots of laws protecting them. And none protecting you. The fair collections acts are a joke. Nobody follows them, and few (if any) are prosecuted for violations, unless they happen to harass the family member of one of the aristocracy.

    29. Re:Hint taken. by Leofcwen · · Score: 1

      It already is, under Common Law which is the law of the land in both the US, UK and other countries. Defamation, libel, slander, etc (depending on the method of abuse). All she has to do is to write an affidavit, get it notarised and send it in to them along with demands of her own, including damages for the harm they caused her. If it was me, I'd go on the offensive as it seems they're the guilty party after all. But saying that, it's always best to study the full facts before taking action.

    30. Re:Hint taken. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First off I AM NOT A LAWYER. This is my understanding of the laws based upon my reading of the same, verified against Counsel. You should refer to a Lawyer if you need Legal advice.

      Now, having said that...

      False reports on a credit report ARE acts of Defamation and Fraud, per the law. And the banking lobby hasn't protected them from this. Look up the Fair Credit Reporting Act for starters. We won't get into the numerous violations of STATE law that're also applicable in this space and the AG's that've been given authority under those same laws to go after you if you DO break the State's laws in this space.

      I'm clearing stuff off applying the FCRA, the FDCPA, and Texas' Debt Collections Act right now. Takes time. Thing is...you've been told lies about this by people that have a vested interest in you not asserting your rights and now you're propagating them.

      Either educate yourself, or retain counsel to act for you on this stuff- but spare everyone else the BS.

    31. Re:Hint taken. by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      I asserted my rights once. The lawyer I hired told me the cheapest and fastest way to get it off my record was to pay it.

      There are lots of laws around this *because* the companies involved are so evil. The laws don't help. They just protect them. Have a bad item on your report? It won't get taken off. The report agency will ask the person claiming it if it's valid. They always say "yes" so it always stays on. You can fight all you like, but you are only tilting at windmills. I have spoken with a lawyer on this, he said the same thing.

      I have educated myself and retained council. The information was consistent. You have no rights. Only corporations have rights.

    32. Re:Hint taken. by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      I may be wrong, but I don't think (in England & Wales) you can involve debt collectors without getting a court order.

      Also, such debt collectors (sheriffs & bailiffs) must be licensed and there are very strict limits on what they can do.

      Nanny state communism and all that, but to me it makes perfect sense. Unlicensed & uncontrolled debt collectors is a clumsy phrase, which is why there's a one word equivalent: gangsters.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    33. Re:Hint taken. by hattig · · Score: 1

      Can't you find a lawyer that will take the case on a pro-bono basis, it looks like a slam dunk.

    34. Re:Hint taken. by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Yay for free speech!

      Does that mean you can do it back to them?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  7. sounds like online gangsters by swschrad · · Score: 2

    blacklisting those punks.

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
  8. Unconscionable Contract clause by imp · · Score: 5, Informative

    First, it's not clear a contract was established. And even if it was, unilateral changes generally are unenforceable. And even if it were there when the attempted purchase was attempted, this is an unconscionable contract clause, against public policy (1st amendment, etc) and should be thrown out.

    This person's best bet is to dispute the credit reports, counter sue for whatever they can think of to recover legal fees.

    If it were me, I'd just send them a letter telling them to go F themselves and I'll see you in court. Bring it. My lawyer, however, would likely wish that I not do that.

    1. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by i+kan+reed · · Score: 2

      Well, honestly, contacts shouldn't ever be something done in bulk like this anyways. The idea that a contract could be "Standardized" is silly. It is clearly not the result of a mutual discussion and agreement, but instead is an imposition by one party on the other.

    2. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      Unless she doesn't value her time, or 'Kleargear' has absolutely no clout to speak of, she'll have a delightful time clearing up the matter with the credit reporting agencies...

    3. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by jcr · · Score: 4, Insightful

      First, it's not clear a contract was established.

      Looks to me like if there was a contract at all, kleargear breached it first by failing to deliver the items ordered.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    4. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by Spazmania · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Contracts of adhesion (unilateral contracts) are generally enforceable but they are "interpreted against the drafter" meaning that any ambiguity is interpreted in favor of the customer.

      Click-through contracts are less likely to be enforceable than something bearing a physical signature. Add a little unconscionability and no court in the land would uphold that contract. If there even was a contract.

      The magic word you're looking for, though, is Libel. These jokers deliberately published a false statement of fact to the credit reporting agencies with the intention of damaging the individual's reputation. That's a cha-ching if you take 'em to court.

      However, this part of the story doesn't quite ring true for me. The credit reporting agencies don't like to accept reports without an SSN. Too high a risk they get applied to the wrong person. So how did folks paid via paypal get enough information to attach a complaint to the person's credit report? Maybe I just don't know enough about how the reporting agencies work but for darn sure there's nothing on my credit report from anyone who didn't have my SSN.

      --
      Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion.
    5. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by OglinTatas · · Score: 4, Funny

      Let your lawyer craft the letter. He would be able to couch it in unimpeachable legalese and would still be able to include your general sentiments.

      It would probably be worded along the lines of: "We refer you to the reply given in the case of Arkell v. Pressdram."

    6. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by ModernGeek · · Score: 4, Funny

      Your lawyer? Any real slashdotter would represent himself all the way to the Supreme Court of the United States and change every other precedent set before them.
      Just ask one, every true slashdot user knows more about the law than anybody else in the legal community.

      Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, more importantly I am not your lawyer. This is not legal advise and should not be construed as such.

      --
      Sig: I stole this sig.
    7. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      how about reporting them to the police for intimidation or extortion i.e demanding money with menaces, Rico (sure they ship across state lines)
      .

      Then you can find civil offenses.

    8. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

      Apparently she has tried to dispute the negative filing. The trouble is that credit bureaus then ask the company that filed the claim if it's legit. If they say it is, then the claim stays. Which is exactly what happened.

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    9. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      First, it's not clear a contract was established. And even if it was, unilateral changes generally are unenforceable. And even if it were there when the attempted purchase was attempted, this is an unconscionable contract clause, against public policy (1st amendment, etc) and should be thrown out.

      Yeah, I was about to post pretty much the same thing, but I'd go one step further. I would argue that such a contract term would be unconscionable and illegal even without the first amendment issue, because a restraint of only negative reviews is contrary to the public interest, creating a false positive impression of a business that is unjustified by its actions. Such a contract effectively constitutes a fraudulent act of false and misleading advertising by the business via its customers, and as such, the contract term is illegal. An illegal contract term is unenforceable per se.

      Make no mistake. It is perfectly legitimate for a contract to say that you cannot write any reviews of the business. It is not legitimate for a contract to dictate that only positive reviews are allowed. There is no question whatsoever that this woman will win in court handily unless her lawyer is completely incompetent unless the business also makes similar threats against anyone who writes a positive review.

      That said, before she even calls a lawyer, this should be brought to the attention of the anti-fraud division in her state's AG's office for possible criminal prosecution of the site's owners and management, under "conspiracy to commit fraud".

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    10. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by Bogtha · · Score: 2

      The First Amendment is not relevant here. The First Amendment restricts Congress from passing laws that restrict freedom of speech. It doesn't restrict people from making contracts to restrict freedom of speech. That happens all the time and is perfectly legal.

      --
      Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
    11. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by MarkvW · · Score: 1

      If a contract was formed, the Company probably has a clause requiring either arbitration or litigation in its home jurisdiction.

    12. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by TangoMargarine · · Score: 1

      Well, we seem to know more about when something is obviously unconstitutional than our own justice system, for one thing.

      --
      Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
    13. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by bobbied · · Score: 2

      Time to sue for defamation then.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    14. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by bobbied · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Your lawyer? Any real slashdotter would represent himself all the way to the Supreme Court of the United States and change every other precedent set before them.

      Most maybe, but not all would do this. Maybe I'm not a "real" shashdotter, but I would NEVER recommend going to court as a litigant without competent legal advice. Trust me, I know from experience that it is NOT a good idea, even in traffic court.

      What's that saying... A man who is his own lawyer has a fool for a client. It's true and I'm not doing that again..

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    15. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's probably some recourse under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, too, where she could sue in Federal court for absurd damages.

    16. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by romco · · Score: 4, Interesting

      > dispute the credit reports

      Dispute it with kleargear.com first. Then dispute with the credit reporting agency. Use registered mail so you have proof.

      If they verify you owe them money sue them under the FDCPA in federal court for attempting to collect a debt that is not due. ($1000 per offence plus any legal costs)

      Let them try to prove a contract exists in federal court.

      --
      AdFuel
    17. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by Greyfox · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's not so much that as it is fraud. Claiming someone's responsible for a clause they never actually agreed to, and billing them for it is fraud. Submitting that bill to a collections agency is fraud and harassment. There shouldn't be a lawsuit. The operator of that site should be arrested. And then there should be a lawsuit.

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    18. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by houghi · · Score: 1

      Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, more importantly I am not your lawyer. This is not legal advise and should not be construed as such.

      If you are not a lawyer, how do I know it is not legal advice and not to be construed as such?

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    19. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by almitydave · · Score: 1

      Interesting... but I'd expect someone doing the same business all the time to have a "standard contract" as a starting point anyway at least, and said person is free to refuse business to anyone who doesn't want to accept the standard contract. It may not be friendly, but it's their right.

      Your idea makes more sense for someone who does fewer sales, where each sale is not expected to occur in a particularly timely fashion, and there's time for things like negotiating whatever terms may be applicable. But in the reality of internet sales, it's not practical.

      Or maybe you're suggesting this type of sale shouldn't involve contracts at all, which is not an entirely ridiculous idea...

      --
      my, your, his/her/its, our, your, their
      I'm, you're, he's/she's/it's, we're, you're, they're
    20. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your lawyer? Any real slashdotter would represent himself all the way to the Supreme Court of the United States and change every other precedent set before them.
      Just ask one, every true slashdot user knows more about the law than anybody else in the legal community.

      The fact that you need to be a lawyer in order to know your rights and what you are liable for so that you are not blind-sided constantly the moment a lawyer opens their mouth or notebook is definitely the sign of a functional and healthy legal system. Assuming you're a licensed lawyer, of course.

    21. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Contracts in general are interperted against the drafter where ambiguity exists.

    22. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      nobody defamed her.

    23. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      I've tried that before. My lawyer told me to pay the fraudulent bill. It's cheaper and has the same effect. That's the system when the corporations dominate and have more rights than the people.

    24. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by jcr · · Score: 2

      stubborn, stupid, and extremely narcissistic people

      In my experience, people fitting that description throw tantrums over trivia like putting four characters at the end of a comment.

      Get some professional help, kid. I'm not going to quit signing my posts just because you're in a snit.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    25. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They take reports without a SSN. I had a gym membership that went into collections, 30 day trial at the time but they screwed up on their end, and I had a nice conversation with the credit report agency about it. I then proceeded to ask the phone rep for their address because I needed to file a bullshit report.

    26. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by Leofcwen · · Score: 1

      As a contractor, I've studied contract law. When they told her about it they were making an offer to contract and if she ignored their offer suggests implicit consent. If she replied though and refused their offer and made her own counter-offer the call situation would be different. This way, if they ignore her counter-offer and say nothing it would be they who agreed to her terms. If she rebutted their offer and made her own through an affidavit they'd have to do the same, rebutting each of her statements, point by point.

    27. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know about absurd damages ($1000 or actual damages, whichever's greater, plus legal fees). However, the AG in the State you reside in most likely takes a dim view (mine does...) on the subject as it violates State and Federal law on the subject and they have the authority to pursue them on at least Civil grounds.

    28. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by Svartalf · · Score: 1

      Actually, depending on the State in question, it *IS* defined as a Deceptive (hint...class of fraud...) Trade Practice. Falls under unconsionable clauses in a contract.

      The fact that they're applying to the party absolutely not involved with the deal...heh... That IS clearly Fraud.

      --
      I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
    29. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A false credit report is defamation

      Defamation

      Any intentional false communication, either written or spoken, that harms a person's reputation; decreases the respect, regard, or confidence in which a person is held; or induces disparaging, hostile, or disagreeable opinions or feelings against a person.

    30. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      A false credit report is defamation

      The law holds that a credit report is not defamatory. The agencies have no knowledge of specific claims, nor the ability to falsify them. And the report doesn't harm anyone, only the inappropriate use of it by others.

      If you don't like it, then become a billionaire, so that you, too, may buy laws to benefit you.

    31. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No the someone should stand ouside the door of the companies CEO, and beat the shit out of him. The law will not help you. The justice system only helps the unjust. Fight for youself. Individuals need to stand up to the tyranny of the injustice system. Laws and lawyers prey on the weak and poor.

    32. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by hattig · · Score: 1

      Or get a Notice Of Correction on the credit report, which at least tries to explain why that black mark is there.

      But seriously, they should be trying to get a lawyer to deal with the case.

      Or a hitman.

    33. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by hattig · · Score: 1

      They want the credit report fixed. Paying the $3500 now will not do that. And it is also the wrong thing to do.

      How can such a case cost the consumer? Surely they can claim for costs after winning the case?

      Again, if there is no legal resort, then firebombing the company's premises and killing the owner's parents is a fairly understandable reaction. (j/k, NSA dudes)

    34. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Darn spell check.... Man, the mental image of someone taking the fame off this lady's picture is funny.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    35. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by Raenex · · Score: 1

      Can I have your name and address? There's a bill I need to send you.

    36. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Yes, you've reached the issue of the tragedy of the commons. It was by far in my best interests to pay the bill and move on. But it's not in the best interest of everyone to do so.

      And I didn't pay that bill, I just didn't go to court to get it removed. I also didn't buy any cars or houses on credit for 10 years. Well, I did, but in a different country, so my credit was clean.

      But yes, your logic and reading skills are useless. You think you come up with some cute twist, showing how you are smart. But I never paid the bill. The question wasn't about paying it. The question was about getting it off your record using the "legal" methods/system. It doesn't happen. And you took my comments specifically on using the system to fix the broken system to incorrectly guess some unrelated fact. And you were wrong. But thanks for trying. Your lack of reading comprehension has been noted.

    37. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      I was once denied credit to buy a house because of a $100 outstanding bill on my credit report. It was genuine and owed by me. A utility company had some charges after the "final" bill that never made it to me, but were owed by me. I paid the $100, and was granted the loan. The $100 delinquent account didn't show up at all the next time I ran my report (not as delinquent but paid or in any capacity). Paying it wiped my credit report clean. I know that's not how it's "supposed to" happen, but then almost nothing related to credit scores works that way either. Maybe the utility pulled it off incorrectly, maybe "previously delinquent, $0 current outstanding" is an entry reserved for revolving credit only. I don't know or care. The point is that the system doesn't work. It doesn't do what it says, and it often doesn't say what it does. It couldn't exist if the politicians didn't grant explicit shields in legislation to the industry.

    38. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by Raenex · · Score: 1

      That's a lot of text to justify your pussy remark.

      But I never paid the bill.

      You didn't state that originally.

      The question wasn't about paying it.

      You made it so by giving the lawyer's suggestion. You even furthered that by saying, " I also didn't buy any cars or houses on credit for 10 years. Well, I did, but in a different country, so my credit was clean. "

    39. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      I gave the facts related to the post I was replying to. You guessed wrong, and are now being an ass because someone else pointed out your error. Next time, try asking rather than guessing. You guessed at the outcome, then posted based on that (with a rude ad hominem), and are all hurt when I respond in kind. The lawyer recommended I pay it (over taking it to court). And, as that is the wrong thing to do, I chose to ignore it and let it set on my credit report. I owned a house and a farm and 4 cars at the time, so I wasn't needing to worry about any credit for the time it could possibly show up on my report. But none of that matters to the question of "can you fight it". To that the answer is"no",.You will not be able to successfully fight a tarnish on your report for less than paying it and getting it removed.

    40. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by Raenex · · Score: 1

      I gave the facts related to the post I was replying to. You guessed wrong

      You can't blame me for poor reading comprehension when you present the lawyer's case and leave it at that. It's poor writing if you don't want to be associated with the position. I'd bet most people thought similar.

      But none of that matters to the question of "can you fight it". To that the answer is"no",.You will not be able to successfully fight a tarnish on your report for less than paying it and getting it removed.

      That's what one lawyer said (or rather, what you said one lawyer said). The person you responded to you say court costs come out of the defendant. But even if the lawyer is 100% right, your plain answer here to "can you fight it" is wrong. You can fight it, it just might cost you more money than otherwise. Some people value principle more than giving money to a bully or suffering a poor credit report.

    41. Re:Unconscionable Contract clause by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can find your SSN pretty easily. A lot of businesses who deal with consumer sales has access to credit reports, you can find anyone pretty easily with the software they provide, even when you don't have the SSN. Kleargear are just assholes to go through that trouble, plain and simple.

  9. Activating Mecha-Streisand by SenorPez · · Score: 1

    Of course, based on the fact that their e-commerce portal looks like something out of 1998, I'd guess that they're not the most heavily-trafficked site.

  10. Welp this will not end well by Malenx · · Score: 3, Interesting

    streisand effect ... Streisand Effect ... STREISAND EFFECT... HOOOO!!!

    1. Re:Welp this will not end well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *starts singing* baaaburaaaa sutreisanooo baaaburaaa

      SP Mecha streisand

  11. "the sales transaction was never completed" by themushroom · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Which is the whole reason why there's a bad review. Seems Kleargear would want to fix that transaction before spending buttloads on dubious litigation, and win the customer back. But they'll discover how both the Internet AND retail business works soon.

    1. Re:"the sales transaction was never completed" by N0Man74 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Indeed. The sale was never completed.

      "In an effort to ensure fair and honest public feedback, and to prevent the publishing of libelous content in any form, your acceptance of this sales contract prohibits you from taking any action that negatively impacts KlearGear.com, its reputation, products, services, management or employees."

      If there was never a completed sale, then do the sale terms even apply even if they hadn't of changed them later?

      If the glove wasn't bought, she owes them... not?

    2. Re:"the sales transaction was never completed" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They should rephrase that. How about something like:
      "To ensure fair and honest public feedback... you are only allowed to say nice things about us or we'll fine the shit out of you, harass you, and damage your reputation."

    3. Re:"the sales transaction was never completed" by mrbester · · Score: 1

      Such a clause would never fly in UK. Statutory rights and all that.

      --
      "Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
    4. Re:"the sales transaction was never completed" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That verbiage in and of itself is an unenforceable sham.

      The two phrases "ensure fair and honest public feedback" and "prohibits you from taking any action that negatively impacts" are contradictory goals.

      It sets up a metaphorical balance scale that tips only in one direction, toward their favor, and that tipping of the scale is not fair nor honest.

  12. ThinkGeek? You mean the cheap DX.com clone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I guess if you're a moron who likes to overspend for gitchy crap, and shipping, you might shop at ThinkGeek.

  13. It sucks, but she should be able to get something by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Since this is baiting slashdot lawyering, I'll say that they are generally causing her grave stress and have fraudulently claimed debts against her. So I believe she and some lucky lawyer will be able to split the houses of the owners of the site within a few months. That is if they are smart enough to settle and not face felony charges that she can easily bring plus win a lawsuit or two.

  14. Give them a call! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    You can also reach us by phone or snail mail at:

      You should give them a call, let them know what you think.
    KLEARGEAR.COM
    2885 Sanford Ave SW Suite #19886
    Grandville, MI 49418
    Se Habla Español
    Phone (866) 598-4296

    1. Re:Give them a call! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Don't bother with regular mail. it appears to be a mail forwarding facility: http://www.mailboxforwarding.com/form1583.php

    2. Re:Give them a call! by Joining+Yet+Again · · Score: 4, Funny

      You mean to say that Sanford Ave doesn't have 19,886 suites?!

    3. Re:Give them a call! by AtariKee · · Score: 1

      Grandville MI? I live eight miles from there, and used to work a mile or so from there. Interesting...

      --
      "You're getting brutal, Sark. Brutal and needlessly sadistic."
      "Thank you, Master Control"
      -Sark and the MCP
    4. Re:Give them a call! by SeaFox · · Score: 1

      I wonder how long it takes to forward the mail all the way to them. I feel like sending them an opened can of tuna as a holiday gift.

  15. Re:ThinkGeek? You mean the cheap DX.com clone? by sandytaru · · Score: 2

    Clearly ThinkGeek has better advertising since I've never heard of DX.com

    --
    Occasionally living proof of the Ballmer peak.
  16. Dear KlearGear.com by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dear KlearGear.com:

    Please, oh please(!), try this shit with me. I really need the money and wiping you off the internet would not only be profitable, but highly satisfying as well.

    Love,

      AC

    P.S. I hear that you eat bags of dicks. Keep it up.

    1. Re:Dear KlearGear.com by Mitreya · · Score: 1

      Please, oh please(!), try this shit with me. I really need the money and wiping you off the internet would not only be profitable, but highly satisfying as well. Love, AC

      And those of us with real names and addresses should admit that we do not actually have the resources to fight a court battle with a company, regardless of how right we might be.

    2. Re:Dear KlearGear.com by Sarten-X · · Score: 1

      I do know a lawyer friend who's looking for some good unusual marketing...

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    3. Re:Dear KlearGear.com by Lisias · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, if the suit is clearly profitable once you win, any reasonably smart lawyer will do it for you without any previous payment in exchange of a good percentage of the loot, I mean, the punitive damages... ;-)

      If the money is good, the lawyer can even pay any fees for you (again, in exchange of a good percentage of the earnings).

      --
      Lisias@Earth.SolarSystem.OrionArm.MilkyWay.Local.Virgo.Universe.org
  17. It's quite simple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If the package was signed for, she's at fault. Otherwise the seller is at fault. The seller is at fault until the package enters the possession of the buyer. The shipper can leave the package on the front door step of the buyer's house, but unless the buyer (or agent, family member, etc) signs something saying that the package is received, the buyer can claim not to have received it. I've tried selling stuff on Amazon before and had dirtbags claim the package wasn't delivered to their PO Box. Without requiring a signature, I lost. My understanding is that it's not just Amazon and Ebay that enforce that; it's either law or pretty darn close to it. Note that delivery confirmation is not enough. You must have a signature. Sure, some delivery companies forge signatures but at least that can be proven later.

  18. Next Headline: by cervesaebraciator · · Score: 4, Funny
    "Slashdot Submitter sabri Facing $3,500 Fine"

    After submitting an article in which kleargear.com was referred to as "some sort of cheap ThinkGeek clone", Slashdot user sabri will be facing several thousand dollars in fines. The stupid asses at kleargear.com don't seem to realize that this sort of thing only gets them bad press. [Editors note: The remainder of this comment has been removed as kleargear.com is threatening Dice Holdings if defamation of their good name continues on our properties.]

    1. Re:Next Headline: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Promptly followed by :

      "Slashdot Comment Author cervesaebraciator Facing $3,500 Fine" ... and now also :

      "Slashdot Comment Author Anonymous Coward Facing $3,500 Fine"

  19. My KlearGear.com Review by MonkeyPaw · · Score: 3, Funny

    Recently I purchased several items from KlearGear.com. Based on their purchase agreement, I can not post negative comments on the Internet about my experience. With that in mind, here is my KlearGear.com review;

    " --- "

    Thank you,

    --
    My studio - www.graylands.ca
    1. Re:My KlearGear.com Review by dgatwood · · Score: 4, Funny

      Oh, I'm sure you can do better than that.

      I recently purchased several items from KlearGear.com. Their purchase agreement prohibits negative comments, so here is my review:

      The can of SPAM® was greatly appreciated. It makes a much better doorstop than the one I ordered, because the metal shards really dig into the rug. Even better, unlike the boxes of SPAM® you buy at the grocery store, this one came with a large hole in the side, so I didn't even have to find a can opener before sucking out the meaty goodness.

      The packaging was in impeccable condition, having only been run over by three UPS trucks—a far cry from the usual twelve. And their customer service can't be beaten. I only had to call 150 times over the course of a three month period to reach someone who helpfully pointed out that I could step on the can of SPAM® I received and use it as a doorstop. And the agents' language was truly amazing. I learned over a hundred new swear words in five languages.

      In short, I cannot recommend this business more highly if you enjoy surprise delivery of products that do not resemble what you ordered and learning how to say f*** off in Swahili while talking to a customer service representative in Tanzania. I know I sure do.

      No one can claim that this is a negative review. :-D

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

  20. I can now thank the Streisand effect... by i_want_you_to_throw_ · · Score: 1

    for not buying anything at kleargear.com. Thanks!

  21. Non-Disparagement Clause by loonycyborg · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If it were in any way legal or enforceable it would be in ToS everywhere.

    1. Re:Non-Disparagement Clause by canajin56 · · Score: 1
      --
      ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI
  22. IANAL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ..but, clearly Jen should have a team of them for the damage they are inflicting to her credit and her well-being.

  23. Re:ThinkGeek? You mean the cheap DX.com clone? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 0

    It's always funny when these sorts of comments are posted anonymously - like we aren't going to figure out the poster has some vested financial interest in whatever silly little fly-by-night company is being shilled in the anonymous post.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  24. awesome reviews by gabrielcrowe · · Score: 2
    1. Re:awesome reviews by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It seems, based on the reports on that link, that KlearGear has sucked as a vendor for five years now.

  25. I wonder if mobsters use this same vebage by JoeyRox · · Score: 1

    "We didn't murder that guy. We made a diligent effort to help them avoid a worse fate"

    I bet whoever made that statement from Kleargear thinks they're really clever. Once this goes in front of a judge they'll quickly learn - not so much.

  26. Re:ThinkGeek? You mean the cheap DX.com clone? by jandrese · · Score: 2

    dx.com is DealExtreme. Say what you will about ThinkGeek's prices, when you order something from there it ships promptly and ends up at your door shortly thereafter. They also have good customer service. DealExtreme on the other hand has a somewhat more challenged reputation.

    --

    I read the internet for the articles.
  27. CFPB by Nick · · Score: 5, Informative

    She needs to go to http://cfpb.gov/ right away and report this. It'll come off her credit reports ~30 days or so later. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau was setup for exactly this kind of thing.

    --
    Fuck Ajit Pai
    1. Re:CFPB by Stormy+Dragon · · Score: 1

      They really need to rename that Bureau. When I first read your comment, I was trying to figure out how calling the Corporation for Public Broadcasting would help.

    2. Re:CFPB by bob_super · · Score: 1

      That's why it's named like that. It's an evil lefty commie thing that the government should never subsidize, like Big Bird.

    3. Re:CFPB by admiralh · · Score: 1

      Yep.

      While we're at it, let's dissolve all those other regulatory agencies like the FDA, USDA, SEC, etc. so we can achieve that libertarian paradise that awaits.

      What was Upton Sinclair so bent out of shape about, anyway? Extra protein, amirite?

      --
      Hopelessly pedantic since 1963.
    4. Re:CFPB by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Actually, the CFPD was set up to ensure that big banks will get bailed out the next time they make a high risk gamble with other people's money and it goes bad. However, they had to give is a name that made people think it was about protecting the little guy

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    5. Re:CFPB by intermodal · · Score: 1

      You do realize that The Jungle is a work of fiction, right?

      --
      In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
    6. Re:CFPB by GameMaster · · Score: 1

      Yes, a work of fiction based extremely closely on the real-life working conditions of the meat-packing industry of the time. The fact that there was a fictitious narrative added to make the story more interesting/readable doesn't invalidate the parts that happen to disagree with your personal political beliefs.

      --

      Rules of Conduct:
      #1 - The DM is always right.
      #2 - If the DM is wrong, see rule #1
    7. Re:CFPB by intermodal · · Score: 1

      Actually I largely agree with the need to improve working conditions at the turn of the 20th century. However, the specific incidents used were not necessarily true to reality, and Sinclair was intending a broader commentary on working conditions as a whole. That a dim view of processed food was what people took away from his work was a source of ire to Mr. Sinclair.

      --
      In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
    8. Re:CFPB by Rob+the+Bold · · Score: 1

      You do realize that The Jungle is a work of fiction, right?

      You realize that it helped bring attention to actual problems, right?

      --
      I am not a crackpot.
    9. Re:CFPB by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 2

      Post publication investigations instituted by President T. Roosevelt found that every type incident described by Sinclair except workers falling into rendering vats and being sold as lard had actually occurred.

    10. Re:CFPB by intermodal · · Score: 1

      Yes, but the matter being specific to the food industry was not something Mr. Upton was intending to imply.

      --
      In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
    11. Re:CFPB by Nick · · Score: 1

      With all due respect I find this comment completely baseless. Consider the fact that Elizabeth Warren was responsible for its foundation. Before I comment further, I must ask; is this a troll or are we not talking about the same thing?

      --
      Fuck Ajit Pai
    12. Re:CFPB by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      We are talking about the government board created by the law written by Christopher Dodd and Barney Frank. Two men who used quite a bit of their political clout to prevent any one from preventing the financial meltdown from happening. And I AM considering the fact that Elizabeth Warren was partially responsible for the creation of this Board that is, for all practical purposes, answerable to no one, least of all the voters of this country. Elizabeth Warren talks a great deal about caring about the common man, but her actions over the course of her career have demonstrated that what she really cares about is the advancement of Elizabeth Warren.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
  28. Just hold on now by Jiro · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If everything is as described, sure, the woman has been mistreated. But on the other hand, she's using Ripoff Report. Slashdot has done an article about a case involving Ripoff Report before, and they themselves absolutely refuse to remove even false information, and then charge people money to dispute it. It's at least as bad as the company she's fighting.

    Look it up. Here, I'll help you. Read the very links described here: "She contacted Ripoffreport.com to ask that the post be removed but Ripoffreport.com won't let her without paying $2000 she says."

    Or go read some of the comments in the earlier article describing how Ripoff Report behaves. http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/12/29/1929228/court-rules-website-doesnt-have-to-remove-defamatory-comments

    1. Re:Just hold on now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Look it up. Here, I'll help you. Read the very links described here: "She contacted Ripoffreport.com to ask that the post be removed but Ripoffreport.com won't let her without paying $2000 she says."

      Now we know why klearclear.com needs the $3500.

    2. Re:Just hold on now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the remaining 1500 is for yelp I presume?

    3. Re:Just hold on now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      the difference here is that the information posted on the ripoffreport.com review was completely true. the emails were cut and paste verbatim.

      source: i'm the woman who broke the story.

    4. Re:Just hold on now by pscottdv · · Score: 1

      So now she's being abused by two shady websites.

      --

      this signature has been removed due to a DMCA takedown notice

    5. Re:Just hold on now by Midnight_Falcon · · Score: 1
      Why is the "woman who broke the story" an AC? :) What's the point of being an AC when you post identifying information!?

      /me is confused

  29. Fair Credit Reporting Act by AlienSexist · · Score: 1

    Such abusive actions on the part of a merchant whereby they involve credit agencies could violate the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Statutory and punitive penalties may apply. It all depends on the appropriate characterization of the customer/merchant relationship, if the merchant is considered a creditor, and the permissibility of the merchant filing a report to the credit bureaus under the circumstances.

    Don't forget an earlier story where a court ruled that Zappos Terms of Service Agreement was invalid because it "didn't force customers to click through to it."

    1. Re:Fair Credit Reporting Act by wiredlogic · · Score: 1

      Permissibility is irrelevant. If you file a false claim to a credit reporting agency you are liable as well along with the reporting agencies if nothing is done within 30 days of receiving notification of a dispute from the consumer.

      --
      I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
  30. kleargear.com by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I never bought anything from them. And thanks to today's Slashdot article, I never will.

  31. Shut Up Already About the Streisand Effect by dmomo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The Streisand Effect is not a rule. It's a rarity. For every story that gets attention this way, there are millions that do not.

    When I see a post on Slashdot about censorship backfiring, without fail, someone will blurt out "Streisand Effect" as if it is an inevitable thing that happens when censorship occurs on the Internet.

    The trouble here is that assuming this is a rule and not a rare edge case brings with it the danger of promoting the idea that censorship is not able to occur on the Internet. ...as if it is inherently censor-proof. The sad thing is, censorship is very real. The stories that allow us to cry "ha ha Streisand Effect" are the exception. They are interesting and attention worthy, or simply lucky.

    I'm glad when the effect occurs, but don't kid yourself.

    1. Re:Shut Up Already About the Streisand Effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Uh, if you're seeing it reported on major websites then that is exactly the Streisand Effect in action.

      True, many things do not get to that point. This one absolutely has otherwise you probably wouldn't even know about it.

    2. Re:Shut Up Already About the Streisand Effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When I see a post on Slashdot about censorship backfiring, without fail, someone will blurt out "Streisand Effect"

      Because that's what it is ...

      as if it is an inevitable thing that happens when censorship occurs on the Internet.

      No one said that, people here just say "streisand effect" whenever it's already happening. It's never that someone on slashdot predicts "inevitable Streisand effect in 3, 2, 1, ..." and then it happens (given that slashdot is always a few days late on these news anyway).

      The trouble here is that assuming this is a rule and not a rare edge case brings with it the danger of promoting the idea that censorship is not able to occur on the Internet. ...as if it is inherently censor-proof. The sad thing is, censorship is very real. The stories that allow us to cry "ha ha Streisand Effect" are the exception. They are interesting and attention worthy, or simply lucky.

      I'm glad when the effect occurs, but don't kid yourself.

      Yes they are the exception, but when they happen, they are an example of the Streisand effect. Nothing less nothing more.

    3. Re:Shut Up Already About the Streisand Effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you completely missed the reality of the situation.

      This IS EXACTLY the Streisand Effect BECAUSE IT HAPPENED THIS WAY!

      WTF kind of crack are you smoking?

      THIS IS THE STREISAND EFFECT EXACTLY BECAUSE OF HOW IT PLAYED OUT!

    4. Re:Shut Up Already About the Streisand Effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe that's why we cry it. Because we have an unfortunately small amount of opportunities to do so.

    5. Re:Shut Up Already About the Streisand Effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you're saying the effect will not occur in this case? You're not making any sense.

  32. The term is "robbed", not "fined." by jcr · · Score: 1

    A fine is a monetary penalty assessed by a legitimate authority. What clear gear is threatening to do is to commit fraud against the customer they failed to serve.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    1. Re:The term is "robbed", not "fined." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm surprised it took this long to find someone mentioning this. The first thing I was thinking is "what legal right does a retailer have to 'fine' someone?". I would think that they can't claim someone else owes them money just by posting something. They would have to sue them and win.

      Of course, I would suspect that a company trying to abuse the law like that would also be the first to back down quickly at the threat of a lawsuit. But I doubt an average person would want to deal with that kind of stress.

    2. Re:The term is "robbed", not "fined." by jcr · · Score: 1

      I would think that they can't claim someone else owes them money just by posting something. They would have to sue them and win.

      Exactly. They'd never get a court to enforce it, and if they do go as far as trying to put this on the victim's credit report, I would expect any credit bureau to remove it immediately upon a complaint.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  33. ripoffreport is supposed to be anonymous... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    ripoffreport is known to be a scam. people post complaints and then you get charged to have them removed. They must be selling your IP address or something to the vendor. Its the only way she can get found out.

    note to self: use a proxy whenever I post complaints about a company online so they can't find me. done.

    1. Re:ripoffreport is supposed to be anonymous... by tibit · · Score: 1

      Supposedly she posted verbatim emails. Even without headers, it's not that hard for kleargear to paste a couple lines into their email search box and find exactly who the complainer was...

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
  34. Re: ThinkGeek? You mean the cheap DX.com clone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you wanna talk about financial interest... Thinkgeek is owned by the same company as Slashdot...

  35. Battletoads by carbuck · · Score: 1

    Sounds like someone needs to make a few calls and see if they have Battletoads in stock

  36. There are a lot of scams out there. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let me tell you one of them ...

    You see an advertisement on TV. They say you have 2 weeks -14 days - for a FULL REFUND if you are not satisfied for ANY reason!

    You order.

    They sit on it for 13 days and then ship it to you.

    You don't like it - and ship it back.

    They won't refund your money and deep in the terms and conditions and privacy policy - they signed you up for a subscription of their ripoff.

    Most banks will not stand behind you because you "agreed to their terms".

    Suck it!

    The product - Colon cleaning and religious items. Go figure.

    ALL TV infomercials are ripoffs. ALL telemarketers are ripoffs and ALL email marketing are ripoffs.

    Period - don't want to hear exceptions because I don't want to explain why you're an idiot or liar.

    1. Re:There are a lot of scams out there. by tibit · · Score: 1

      ALL TV infomercials are ripoffs. ALL telemarketers are ripoffs and ALL email marketing are ripoffs.

      I think I can't but agree :(

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    2. Re:There are a lot of scams out there. by ledow · · Score: 1

      And people who don't understand their consumer rights and the point of a contract being "fair" in law often cave because they are told by the other party (who has an interest in lying) that there's nothing they can do about it.

      Hint: You probably bought on credit card. You report it. If the credit card company pulls that shit, you take them to court.

      Sure, it's a hassle, but you're in the right legally to stomp on that kind of shit.

    3. Re:There are a lot of scams out there. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only marketing emails I receive are from either Newegg or the Humble Bundle explaining what sales they currently have. You can argue that some of the stuff Newegg sells could be garbage and I'm overpaying for it, but I've only ever had 1 bad experience with them over the years and averaging several thousands of dollars in orders per year, so I don't think that's too accurate. That bad experience wasn't really even Newegg's fault, but HP's. For the Humble Bundle, I find it hard to believe anyone could complain about that. You pay your own price, get great products, it is DRM free (unless explicitly stated), and Humble just seems to go far out of their way in the best interest of their customers.

      That being said, I think other companies need to look into this. If you actually provide a good product for a reasonable price while respecting your customer, you're probably going to do well. Sometimes, you need to overcome greed in the short term to gain mass wealth in the long run.

    4. Re:There are a lot of scams out there. by mrbester · · Score: 1

      In UK, Distance Selling law stipulates that the time period for return begins when you receive the item, not when they declare it shipped.

      --
      "Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
  37. Another reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Never use your real name on those series of tubes that is called the Internets.

  38. How could this affect her credit? by Cyfun · · Score: 1

    Am I the only one wondering how in the fuck some random company was able to just make up a charge out of thin air and then destroy her credit over it?

    --
    In Soviet Russia, dot slashes YOU!
    1. Re:How could this affect her credit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's how credit reporting agencies work (there's only a few). Any claim someone makes over someone owing them money gets reported. Getting that removed is the hard part. The agencies don't even try to care.

    2. Re:How could this affect her credit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what they did was claim that it was an unpaid invoice, and after 30 days it was sent to a "third party collections agent", which was probably nothing more than someone sitting at a desk next to them.

      the credit destroying part is when a charge that huge shows up as a negative on your credit report, and you end up with either automatic denials for financing, or you have to sit there and explain the entire story to a loan officer and hope that they're willing to look past it.

    3. Re:How could this affect her credit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Her husband made the purchase using PayPal in 2008. It wasn't a credit card account. I'm not sure PayPal even applies to the banking laws TODAY. So, kleargear may have talked them into charging it.

      Even Utilities and landlords can report you to credit agencies. Your gas & electric bills are "lines of credit". I think even failure to pay rent gets reported.

  39. ripoffreport.com is part of the problem by wwalker · · Score: 3, Informative

    While I have absolutely no sympathy for all the hate that the keangear asshats will get from this, I just wish that ripoffreport.com would get their share of it. Did you know that if you pay them money, they will happily turn all the negative reports about your business into positive? They call it "Corporate Advocacy Program", but the real name of it should be "blackmail and extortion". Absolutely anyone can post anything about any business, be it true or a complete lie, and the business owner has absolutely no way for defending themselves. Except if you pay ripoffreport.com a few hundred bucks and then all negative reports go away. And they even claim that they will help place the newly positive reviews "at the top of search engines", whatever the hell that means. See, they do it to benefit the consumer and to assure the complete satisfaction, and not at all to blackmail small businesses and extort money from them:
    http://www.ripoffreport.com/CorporateAdvocacyProgram/Change-Report-From-Negative-To-Positive.aspx

  40. Is this for real? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, as all I read was this /. article I have to say that it is one of the worst written, and totally silly arse that I've read in a while.
    The person obviously doesn't know the first thing about law, nor common sense.

    How can /. post articles of such massive bowel movement?

  41. (866) 598-4296 by frovingslosh · · Score: 4, Informative

    Their phone number is (866) 598-4296. They will pay for the call for you to call them and tell them what you think.

    --
    I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
    1. Re:(866) 598-4296 by mythosaz · · Score: 4, Funny

      If only they had a toll-free fax number.

      I still own a plain-paper fax, black construction paper, and a roll of tape.

      Mobius fax, FTW.

      They're probably busy. I'll fax them after they leave for the weekend.

    2. Re:(866) 598-4296 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I like that idea. beee yooo tee full!!

    3. Re:(866) 598-4296 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You mean this: 888 553 2743?

      Kleargear

    4. Re:(866) 598-4296 by ShaunC · · Score: 0

      All that's going to accomplish is to momentarily delay their FaxPress (or whatever) for a little while, and perhaps bombard some email account with a bunch of TIFF or PDF files that they'll delete in a few seconds. You may still own a plain-paper fax, but nobody in the enterprise does anymore.

      --
      Thanks to the War on Drugs, it's easier to buy meth than it is to buy cold medicine!
    5. Re:(866) 598-4296 by BringsApples · · Score: 1

      It's 18:14 here in central time zone (America) and the number is still busy, nice.

      Is this a form of DoS attack?

      --
      Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
    6. Re:(866) 598-4296 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Moebius fax. You, sir, are a genius!

    7. Re:(866) 598-4296 by s.petry · · Score: 1

      Hahahaha!!

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    8. Re:(866) 598-4296 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd like to see a video if you really have the moebius fax running. Till then I'll stick to a simple endless loop with white stick figures doing some stunts in that loop. Zoetrope for the win.

    9. Re:(866) 598-4296 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Phone is now gone.

    10. Re:(866) 598-4296 by tragedy · · Score: 1

      A. Chances are pretty good, in this day and age, that they use some sort of fax service rather than a physical plain paper fax on their end, so you wouldn't achieve much other than a mild DOS attack on their incoming faxes. Not to mention that there are laws against that sort of thing now, and they can track you down pretty easily.

      B. Why does it need to be a mobius strip rather than just a plain loop? I mean, if you were sending a repeating message, I suppose you could get twice the message length for the same amount of paper, but you're just planning to send entirely black pages, so what's the point? For that matter, preventing the twist from jamming in the machine would be a pain. You would have to use a longer loop of paper and probably rig up some rollers to keep the twist away from the paper in slot on the Fax machine.

    11. Re:(866) 598-4296 by sayno2quat · · Score: 1

      Mobius fax, FTW.

      Why Mobius? You don't need to twist the loop in order for it to perpetually fax.

      --
      Sure I sold you robot insurance. But you were attacked by a cyborg. Not covered.
  42. Credit Reporting Agencies by Spiked_Three · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Do you realize that credit reporting agencies are 'regulated' and that means absolutely nothing?

    All that smoke and mirrors they put out about checking your credit report, and fixing errors, doesn't really happen. It is there ONLY so the consumer thinks credit reporting is fair. The fact is the credit reporting agency 1) makes more money from you 2) ignores your request to fix items. Why should they care? You CAN NOT sue them. Bet you didn't know that did you? Only a state's attorney Generals can sue a credit reporting agency. That is part of the deal they got to support fair credit laws in the first place. Like just about everything else in this country lately, they had a huge lobbying effort to exclude themselves from lawsuits, took all your representatives to steak and lobster dinner, and called it something that sounded like it was made to protect the consumer. IT IS NOT!

    If you go through the trouble of writing them to correct something, they just send you a generic letter; "We do not understand your request." Since you can not sue, that is the end of it.

    So the root of this problem is both the slimey business, but as much the slimey credit reporting agencies that make it a viable business model. Experian will even sell social securrity numbers to crooks now to make money;

    http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2013/10/25/experian_data_broker_social_security_numbers_sold_to_identity_thieves.html

    --
    slashdot troll = you make a compelling argument I do not like the implications of.
    1. Re:Credit Reporting Agencies by mythosaz · · Score: 1

      > attorney Generals

      Attorneys General

    2. Re:Credit Reporting Agencies by wiredlogic · · Score: 1

      They do have to care if you follow the dispute procedures outlined in the FCRA. Once that is done they are liable for fines if the dispute is not resolved within 30 days.

      --
      I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
    3. Re:Credit Reporting Agencies by ageoffri · · Score: 4, Informative
      Pretty much everything you stated is wrong. You can sue all three of the consumer credit reporting agencies in small claims court assuming you followed the processes outlined in the federal laws for consumer protection.

      http://www.bankrate.com/brm/news/special/19990820.asp

      Check out creditboards.com and the ficoforums.myfico.com and you will find multiple success stories of people suing one or more of the CRA's.

      I can also say that from personal experience that merely making the threat to the CRA that you will be suing them in small claims court with proper citations will cause the CRA to fix their errors.

      --
      -- Slashdot, making the Left look conservative since 1997.
    4. Re:Credit Reporting Agencies by Spiked_Three · · Score: 0

      WTF? You post and article that says just about the exact thing I said, call me wrong and get modded informative.

      Did any of you idiot moderators even read the linked articles or do you just enjoy sucking this guys diick?

      --
      slashdot troll = you make a compelling argument I do not like the implications of.
    5. Re:Credit Reporting Agencies by ageoffri · · Score: 3
      Apparently you didn't read the article. So I'll quote the part that matters.

      "The Fair Credit Reporting Act, which governs credit reporting, says that only a state's attorney general can sue a creditor for furnishing inaccurate information. But if the creditor doesn't fix the inaccuracy permanently and in a reasonable time, you can sue, even though the Fair Credit Reporting Act doesn't explicitly give you that option."

      The reason that people can sue is on the grounds of the CRA not fixing inaccurate information. The article makes it very clear that the public uses those grounds to sue, not the grounds of providing inaccurate information. So yes you can sue and it happens all the time, people win quite often against the CRA's when they do their homework. Especially effective in a few states like Texas and California where you can also use State level laws in addition to the federal.

      --
      -- Slashdot, making the Left look conservative since 1997.
    6. Re:Credit Reporting Agencies by Spiked_Three · · Score: 0

      and again your dick sucking moderator mods you up

      Look asswipe, it doesn't happen that way. You go to the clerk, say you want to sue a CRA and they laugh you out of the building. Some folks were pissed enough to pay a lawyer big bucks, and sue the 'reporters' of the credit information for defamation, but you can't sue the CRA. I don't care how many fantasy sucking followers you have, it doesn't happen to regular folks.

      "Credit bureaus won't help you much under those circumstances. They'll continue to report what creditors tell them. It's up to you to work things out with the bank, mortgage company, credit-card company or department store that messed up your credit record in the first place.

      You can have statements attached to your file disputing the information, but it still will turn up on your credit report. But that was pretty much assumed to be as far as a wronged consumer could go.

      The Fair Credit Reporting Act, which governs credit reporting, says that only a state's attorney general can sue a creditor for furnishing inaccurate information. But if the creditor doesn't fix the inaccuracy permanently and in a reasonable time, you can sue, even though the Fair Credit Reporting Act doesn't explicitly give you that option."

      So yeah, if you pay a lawyer enough, he can use a loophole for slander/libel, but you can NOT sue the CRA for reporting inaccurate information, as a result of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Got it?

      --
      slashdot troll = you make a compelling argument I do not like the implications of.
    7. Re:Credit Reporting Agencies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      dumbass...small claims is typically for 5000 or less, more than that too bad.

    8. Re:Credit Reporting Agencies by Spiked_Three · · Score: 2

      Well at least I got the information out there, regardless of this douchebag and the douche bag moderators.

      Hopefully some readers can comprehend the difference between e Credit Reporting Agency, and a 'Creditor'.

      What ageoffri has posted is bullshit. He never 'spoke' to a credit agency. He never threatened anyone. You never get past a $.50 a day operator in India.

      I went through all of this. Got laughed out by the clerk. Got laughed at by the Rental company that refused me housing because of inaccurate data, and was refused living. Got the standard 'we don't understand' letter from the CRA. And can not do dick myself about reporting so flakey it does not even provide contact information.

      The only option is to hire a lawyer who does not really give a crap about you but who is ALSO only interested in how much money they can make from credit reporting fraud. It is a fucked up government supported and encouraged system.

      --
      slashdot troll = you make a compelling argument I do not like the implications of.
    9. Re:Credit Reporting Agencies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because putting innocent people who pay their dues on the bad credit list is rather self-defeating and bad for business? How many people can you put on that list till it starts affecting your business? Oh that's right, that's why all these stores and shops advertise "Bad credit, no problem" because they know it's absolute bullshit and extremely bad for business.

  43. Something I've learned over the last decade... by tekrat · · Score: 0

    The internet used to be a cool place full of like-minded geeks.

    Over the last decade or so however, the internet, and the web in particular, has morphed into a giant scam, and we're all suckers for taking part in it.

    Consider even the simple act of clicking on a news story on a website; before the webpage even loads entirely, a video-ad will play, with no way to close it. And after the ad is done, the content you're looking for is 'not available' or is blocked/grey'ed-out until you sign up for the news-site's spam service that you can then never unsubscribe from.

    Yes, the web is a total scam at this point, and the only winning move is not to play. Thanks Joshua.

    --
    If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
    1. Re:Something I've learned over the last decade... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about a nice game of chess?

  44. Goverment to blame. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is a direct result of goverment regulation. If we could get the goverments hands out of everyone's pockets long enough to end the ridiculous amount of regulation and incompetence in the goverment maybe things will get better.

  45. Kleargear apparently cowards as well as bullies. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They're deleting their facebook comments. That's good. I have a new hobby! I hope you'll join me. It will be fun to watch this nasty ship sink under the fussilade of our geekiness.

  46. `What does this say about the credit agencies? by sjames · · Score: 1

    Some nobody of a company wants to assess an illegal fine and reports it's non-payment and the agencies automatically accept it as fact and ding her credit report? Libel also includes untrue things you print with reckless disregard for the truth, not just things you know are untrue.

  47. um by Charliemopps · · Score: 0

    She needs to talk to her credit card company. She has all the power here. If VISA finds out about this they'll pull the sites contract in a heartbeat and they'll be out of business in a week.

  48. Re:ThinkGeek? You mean the cheap DX.com clone? by mythosaz · · Score: 3, Informative

    I ordered hundreds of dollars of equipment from dx.com/dealextreme.com over the years.

    The absolute worst things that's happened to me is that something was out of stock, and they credited me for my order.

    Say what you want about ordering things on the slow boat from China, but DX, overall, has pretty good customer service -- especially for a company that'll send you a $2.97 butane torch (filled with butane!) from Asia, shipping included.

    http://dx.com/p/jet-1300-c-butane-lighter-1320

    My cigars thank them.

  49. let us make one thing absolutely clear by ihtoit · · Score: 1

    only a COURT OF LAW has the legal authority to impose a "fine". What this is, is tantamount to extortion. If she paid money (ie it left her account), and didn't receive the goods, then she has every fucking right to complain! My advice (IAAL, IANYL): take this upstart company to the fucking cleaners in a private criminal prosecution. Obtain the judgement in favour (this is open and fucking shut!) and use that to sue for punitive damages (NO LIMIT!)

    --
    Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
    1. Re:let us make one thing absolutely clear by ihtoit · · Score: 1

      replying to myself, I know, I know...

      In 2010 I posted a scathing review of a solicitor who had let me down BADLY. I mean, totally betrayed me and cost me a LOT. Almost my entire family, in fact. The solicitor wrote me via email and threatened to sue *me* if I did not retract the review.

      I told 'em to fill their fuckin' boots, I know and they knew that I'd bury them under the one thing I was willing to provide to prove my case against them: EVIDENCE which THEY had provided!

      --
      Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
  50. Unenforcable by CuteSteveJobs · · Score: 2

    Only the government can punish people. Civil courts strike down punitive (punishing) clauses in contracts. In court, it would be unenforceable. Also violates her 1st Amendment rights. kleargear's case has humiliating fail written all over it.

  51. ripoffreport.com by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    After receiving the threat she says she was terrified. She contacted Ripoffreport.com to ask that the post be removed but Ripoffreport.com won't let her without paying $2000 she says.

    Sounds like ripoffreport.com is no bargain either.

  52. ripoffreport.com 40% OFF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FTA: "...But Jen says she was not always so defiant. After receiving the threat she says she was terrified. She contacted Ripoffreport.com to ask that the post be removed but Ripoffreport.com won't let her without paying $2000 she says."

    So, ripoffreport.com offered to charge her $2,000 instead of of $3,500, a 40% savings of $1,500.

  53. Re: ThinkGeek? You mean the cheap DX.com clone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wrong

  54. This is why I would post a review from a Panera or by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Starbucks.

    Just spoof my MAC address and I have total anonymity.

  55. Re:ThinkGeek? You mean the cheap DX.com clone? by Belial6 · · Score: 1

    I used to purchase a bunch of stuff from DX. I quit because their shipping was frequently so slow that I didn't need what was ordered by the time it got here. My longest wait was 4 months for items that said they were in stock the entire 4 months. Everything I ordered did come in. It just took forever to get here.

  56. Oh wow by Arancaytar · · Score: 1

    They're trying to enforce "a clause which did not exist at the alleged time of purchase" on a "transaction was never completed"?

    That sounds pretty close to fraud.

  57. who are the directors ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    anyone know the directors names ? you know for research purposes../pinky

    1. Re:who are the directors ? by sugar+and+acid · · Score: 1

      From a PR puff piece a year or so ago. http://www.prweb.com/releases/2012/4/prweb9444835.htm

      So the President of the company is "Lee Gersten".

      The pr guy on the puff piece is Rob Key pr@kleargear.com .

  58. Time for the OATMEAL EFFECT by gelfling · · Score: 1

    Crush that website w.o. mercy. Kill them all.

  59. Re:ThinkGeek? You mean the cheap DX.com clone? by painandgreed · · Score: 1

    I ordered hundreds of dollars of equipment from dx.com/dealextreme.com over the years.

    The absolute worst things that's happened to me is that something was out of stock, and they credited me for my order.

    Say what you want about ordering things on the slow boat from China, but DX, overall, has pretty good customer service -- especially for a company that'll send you a $2.97 butane torch (filled with butane!) from Asia, shipping included.

    http://dx.com/p/jet-1300-c-butane-lighter-1320

    My cigars thank them.

    I really like how Lighters are listed in the Toy section.

  60. Wow by snoopyowns · · Score: 0

    So she is being blackmailed into a $3500 fine by Kleargear.com, and the post cannot be removed because RipoffReport.com is blackmailing her for $2000. I wonder if she should write a ripoff report about RipoffReport.com on RipoffReport.com. :)

  61. Rob Key CMO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    pr@kleargear.com

  62. I'd just take them to court by Karmashock · · Score: 1

    This is clearly illegal.

    --
    I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
  63. Kleargear turned my life into a c&w sad song by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I posted a negative review of KlearGear a few months back and now my life is in ruins, the next day my dog died, the day after that my wife (bitch) left me for my best friend (bastard), then I got a visit from the bank saying if I don't cough up x thousand dollars within the next 7 days they'll reposess my house, then I got fired from work because the company had gone into administration, the next day a tornado swept through my neighborhood and took the roof clean off, strangely none of the other houses in my street were damaged.

    All because of a shitty little petty company called KlearGear. I hope you're satisfied with yourselves now, assholes!

  64. Ripoffreport by MysteriousPreacher · · Score: 2

    Editors, would you exercise some kind of fucking diligence here?

    Ripoffreport is a random soundboard for anything. For example: a search for the word "meth":

    Jenny muniz Jenevieve muniz Crystal meth addict. thief. con. burnt down her mothers house. las vegas Nevada

    Apple Unlimited owned by Dave Apple Manipulative crystal meth addict sexually harasses employees and takes advantage of employees...and gets away with it Virginia Beach Virginia

    FRANKIE LEE DEAVER DEAVER, FRANKIE LEE SCAM ARTIST !!! METH HEAD !!!! ADDICT !!!! CHRONIC JAILBIRD !!!! ANDERSON Missouri

    Follow the link to kutv. It mentions Ripoffreport asking a 2000 dollar fee to remove her feedback? An important point missing from the summary. Is this true? If so, why is this mentioned but not mentioned in Techdirt's article or otherwise followed up?

    Isn't there a legitimate mechanism to be used when Kleargear, a company that tries too hard to be geeky, is alleged to lie to credit agencies? Kleargear seems to be a bit iffy. They plaster their site in "verified by x" badges. Buysafe? What the fuck is that? I don't know, but for some reason I'm reassured that this hitherto unknown company guarantees this site is inspected and monitored. They have a TRUSTe seal! Wow, they've promised to abide by security policies that'll most likely never be inspected. TRUSTe means fuck all positive. Oh, but wait. They carry a badge from inc.com! Meh, it's the LinkedIn of companies. I'm a professor at MIT, and I have a 14" dick. If you believe that then TRUSTe probably means something to you.

    tl;dr: Kleargear is at best a company that protests far too much. Ripoffreport is as good a source of information as YouTube comments. Slashdot editors don't bother following any links,and Slashdot is somewhere between The Weekly World News and Heat magazine.

    --
    -- Using the preview button since 2005
    1. Re:Ripoffreport by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Isn't there a legitimate mechanism to be used when Kleargear, a company that tries too hard to be geeky, is alleged to lie to credit agencies?

      Yes there is. It's called a CRA dispute.

      If the creditor fraudulently "validates the debt", then sue for the FCBA violations.

    2. Re:Ripoffreport by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Sorry... not FCBA; FCRA violations, for fraudulently reporting an amount as credit extended.

      With the "$3500 penalty fine"; and non-delivered merchandise; there is not a product or service (no consideration), and no money lent, with no goods exchanged, the consumer is not bound to the contract, therefore, and there is no amount due without adjudication by a court (No amount due).

      FCRA statutory damages are a maximum of $1000 in statutory damages for each violation that has occured, plus punitive damages, plus reasonable attorney's fees and costs, for willful noncompliance; for negligence, actual damages plus attorney's fees.

  65. I just loved this part of the original article:

    "But Jen says she was not always so defiant. After receiving the threat she says she was terrified. She contacted Ripoffreport.com to ask that the post be removed but Ripoffreport.com won't let her without paying $2000 she says."

    Someone hurry up and write a ripoff report at rippoffreport.com!

  66. The famous "PostaDeadbeat.com" by Zomalaja · · Score: 1

    shares an address with the address on Kleargear.com, so it would be simple to put her name on their site. Google Maps for that address doesn't list Kleargear as being there at all. Nice....

  67. fraud by jbolden · · Score: 1

    The credit agencies are going to hit the roof. They are regulated. Unilateral debts which is a fine, are clear cut violations of their terms of service. They are definitely going to revoke kleargear.com's membership and may go much further than that.

  68. Time for a social semantic desktop by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 1

    I've worked towards on on-and-off. Sort of like a better email but for any sort of data...

    --
    A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
  69. You feed it bacon covered in cheese and gravy? by raymorris · · Score: 2

    As long as you satisfy all of the natural instincts that your cat has

    My natural instincts tell me that bacon slathered in gravy and topped with cheese is delicious. My natural instinct says "I'd hit it" about eight times a day. My natural instinct is to punch that asshole square in the mouth.

    I have a brain capable of rational thought, though, so I eat vegetables, sleep with my wife, and refrain from hitting people.

    I hope you're not so cruel as indulge all of your cat's natural instincts.

  70. Woman Facing $3,500 Fine For Posting Online Revie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No. No, she's not.

  71. Kleargear facebook page .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...has gone bybye's I would imagine the shredder is overheating right about now too

    1. Re:Kleargear facebook page .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...and immediately been replaced by zombie placeholder....

  72. Blackmail plain and simple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I would award her a minimum $3.5 million in damages, preferably a lot more - to send a message to this company and others, that attempting to "shut people up" will not be tolerated.

  73. In Canada it's arguably fraud by davecb · · Score: 1

    "attempting to obtain money upon a false and fraudulent pretense", an offence under the criminal code, 380(1)(a), 6 month to 2 years, or just possibly extortion, 253(1.3), good for 14 years. Consult a detective, not a lawyer.

    The burden of proof is higher than a suit, but the consequences for the criminal are much more appropriate (:-))

    --dave

    --
    davecb@spamcop.net
  74. apparently you don't understand the service by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Credit agencies do not simply whack whatever Joe Website tells them in their database, such a database would be fucking useless to its other customers and they would end up taking their business to a less naïve agency. All the legal/marketing bullshit in the world will not save an agency trying to sell a worthless service.

    The agency which can provide a lender with reasons to charge a consumer a higher rate IS providing a more valuable service to the lender who is their client. The days when agencies wanted any excuse to make the loan went out the window during 2007-2008 for reasons you might possibly have heard about.

  75. How? by Holi · · Score: 2

    How do you report someone to the credit bureaus without a ssn?
    Did they open a line of credit with this website? Otherwise how did they get this lady's ssn?

    --
    Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
    1. Re:How? by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      maybe they bought the ssn from said credit bureau.

      yeah, would be nice to have some database laws about persons, 'aight?

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  76. What a bunch of fuck tards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Some one needs to organize a class-action lawsuit .

  77. Is this a business model? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Perhaps this is a business model:

    1. Don't deliver ordered products.
    2. Watch review sites for bad reviews.
    3. Sue the reviewer for $3,500.
    4. Profit!

  78. ....business death penalties by harvey+the+nerd · · Score: 1

    ...or being allowed to file [presumably false] credit reports. Likewise, need small claims court action on false credit reports.

  79. He's not being nice, he's being an asshole by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He's showing you, the clueless parent, how the hell you're supposed to hunt.

    It's the cat equivalent of you moving your granny off her computer when she wants to go read some emails and then writing an email application to show her how brilliant you are at computers.

    Cats are dicks.

  80. Everything about this company screams fraud by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Press release from some years back.

    SAN ANTONIO, Texas, June 9 /PRNewswire/ -- KlearGear.com (a wholly-owned subsidiary of catalog and e-commerce conglomerate Havaco Direct Inc.) offers the best in unique gift and gizmo ideas this Father's Day with guaranteed holiday delivery for last-minute shoppers.

        For more information contact:
          Will Bermender
          KlearGear.com - Havaco Direct, Inc.
          William.Bermender@Havaco.com
          +1-214-432-7923

    KlearGear.com is using private domain registration.

    Registrar: GoDaddy.com, LLC
    Registrant Name: Registration Private
    Registrant Organization: Domains By Proxy, LLC
    Registrant Street: DomainsByProxy.com
    Registrant Street: 14747 N Northsight Blvd Suite 111, PMB 309

    While Havaco.com, supposedly its parent company, is now a parked domain. Probably because the company owner have moved kleargear.com to another shell company by now.

    ProTIP: If you want to stay under the radar, stop pulling stupid shit.

    This post is a diligent effort to help Will Bermender from continue being a complete moron.

  81. The witch hunt has begun by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just spotted this else where while searching for the company owner, turns out the witch hunt has already begun :

    scott Nov 15, 2013 @10:50 am
    BBB says their legal dept. is here:
    7122 Oaklawn Drive, San Antonio, TX 78229-3021
    which turns out to be Chenal Corp.:

    http://chenalcorp.com/
    seems shady so far
    Edit – BINGO! Paydirt!
    http://edgar.secdatabase.com/2115/150017010000001/filing-main.htm

  82. Fraud by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The link to that language is from a web archive, because KlearGear has now sent it to the memory hole upon public scrutiny. Tim Cushing at Techdirt points out that, according to the Internet Archive, the clause didn't even exist when Jen Palmer clicked "yes" and bought her bauble from KlearGear. That suggests that KlearGear made a demand for money to Jen Palmer based on a contract she never signed. There's a word for that: fraud.

  83. Re:Well..This Wins the Prize... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...for maximum density of BS per screen-square-inch as anything I've ever seen dribble out of the mouth of a Tea Party Activist. I've seldom seen such a perfect representation of "diarrhea of the brain" all in one place. Bravo!

  84. Re:ThinkGeek? You mean the cheap DX.com clone? by jo_ham · · Score: 1

    Speak for yourself, I only light my cigars with whale oil.

  85. Complaints? by edibobb · · Score: 1
    1. Re:Complaints? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apparently something broke!

      http://lib.store.yahoo.net/lib/yhst-78359274419338/notice-lr.jpg

  86. Just emailed them... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Just wondering if there will be a going out of business sale?

    Thanks!"

  87. Counter Sue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All she has to do is counter-sue for millions due to public harassment and defamation, as well as emotional trauma from this experience.

    THAT's the "American Way".

  88. Counter sue... by niftymitch · · Score: 1

    Failure to deliver is breach of contract.

    Thus... At the time of the bad review I cannot believe
    the contract was in effect especially if there was
    communication with customer service to correct
    the problem.

    The Contract specifies a penalty so four times
    that penalty plus legal fees.

    Good thing I am not an attorney.

    Defamation of character and anything else that
    results from them contacting credit companies
    and attempting to attach you banking.

    --
    Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't. Mark Twain.
  89. See lawyer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Go to Popehat.com and see what lawyers think about this. They are on her side. However, the company has ruined her credit no matter what by reporting her for a non-existent debt.