# web site for non payers?



## computerman (17 Jan 2009)

A little advice please!!!

Having been recently screwed by a client, and assuming that there are many more out there like me!!, would it be possible to create / legal to create a website/forum/blog, listing companies that are bad payers?

Suppliers etc like my self could then look at an alphabetical list, see if their new customer is listed and then make an informed decision as to whether to deal with them or not?


----------



## Eblanoid (17 Jan 2009)

Stubbs has been doing something like this for a long time:
[broken link removed]


----------



## mercman (17 Jan 2009)

There is a difference between Bad and slow payers and Judgments. That is a superb idea. If the offender was given a week to pay or else their names would appear on the list might just speed up the process of the delaying tactics.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (17 Jan 2009)

Yes, I thought that this would be a very useful service. However,  I don't see how you could get around the abuse of the site and the defamation suits.

I haven't found Stubbs any good. what do you see if you register?  A list of judgements in alpha order? But there are lots of bad payers who don't have judgements. 

Brendan


----------



## PaddyBloggit (17 Jan 2009)

Just wondering ... what would the legality behind listing companies on a defaulters' website be? Surely a legal judgement would have to be made before they could be publicly named and shamed.

If a Joe Soap set up a site listing defaulters could they be asking for trouble?


----------



## bond-007 (17 Jan 2009)

I would hope that Mr. Soap has a good legal team.


----------



## computerman (17 Jan 2009)

What if mr soap registered a site (dot com  -  not a dot ie )and had it hosted outside the state.  A disclaimer was written on the front page along with a note stating that anyone who acesd the site had first to register and accept liability for any information that they posted.

Proof could be requested e.g. copy of original invoice and a statement issued 60 days later(scaned and posted to the site as a jpeg).

Any other suggestions?


----------



## computerman (17 Jan 2009)

I should say, that mr soap is not looking for judgements or anything else, just a list of people who pay late.  ....... a kind of service for the little people!   an internet joe duffy!!!!!


----------



## rmelly (17 Jan 2009)

computerman said:


> What if mr soap registered a site (dot com - not a dot ie )and had it hosted outside the state. A disclaimer was written on the front page along with a note stating that anyone who acesd the site had first to register and accept liability for any information that they posted.


 
You'd still have responsibility.



> Proof could be requested e.g. copy of original invoice and a statement issued 60 days later(scaned and posted to the site as a jpeg).


 
Proof of what? How would these prove that something wasn't paid? Plus they could easily be mocked up etc.



> an internet joe duffy!!!!!


 
The key difference is Joe Duffy generally gives the accused the right to respond - will you?


----------



## computerman (18 Jan 2009)

Im not Mr Soap!!!

Of course everyone deserves the right to respond, the advantage with a website is that they can respond anytime where as a live radio show is restricted to the time that its on air.


----------



## aetius (18 Jan 2009)

I'm reminded of all those ratings sites e.g. ratemyteacher or ratemysolicitor - while undoubtedly a few of the ratings were true and accurate, you will need deep deep pockets to defend yourself.


----------



## theengineer (18 Jan 2009)

rmelly said:


> You'd still have responsibility.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 

Usually no smoke without fire


----------



## rmelly (19 Jan 2009)

computerman said:


> Im not Mr Soap!!!
> 
> Of course everyone deserves the right to respond, the advantage with a website is that they can respond anytime where as a live radio show is restricted to the time that its on air.


 
For it to be anyway fair, you would need to notify them at the time of the item being posted to the site or in advance of it being posted - otherwise you'd be relying on them hearing about it by word of mouth or by accident which isn't fair.

The point about responding anytime cuts both ways - once on the web it's there until taken down. The same is generally less true of radio, although joe duffy is available via podcast.


----------



## rmelly (19 Jan 2009)

theengineer said:


> Usually no smoke without fire


 
Not always though. There's always the dodgy one who doesn't supply what he promised but still demands full payment.


----------



## Complainer (19 Jan 2009)

theengineer said:


> Usually no smoke without fire


Have you stopped beating your wife yet, Theengineer?

[Just thought you might want to understand how it feels to have a wild allegation levelled at you from anonymous parties on a bulletin board]


----------



## mercman (19 Jan 2009)

rmelly said:


> key difference is Joe Duffy generally gives the accused the right to respond - will you?



Well you could give them the same right by telling them of your intentions and the right to pay their debt or else posting it on the Web.


----------



## Bob_tg (20 Jan 2009)

Brendan said:


> Yes, I thought that this would be a very useful service.


 
Even though the idea has merit, I do not think the service would be useful.

Many problems with payment can be down to partial fault on the seller's side.  For example, paperwork may not have been filled in correctly (missing PO number), or they may be late in sending an overdue invoice and thereby come under pressure for payment.  In many cases, it is kind of a grey area, where some kind of collaboration between seller and buyer is required to resolve the situation.  

Aside from the libel issue (which is probably the biggest obstacle), I can't see how a website could distinguish between the genuine cases and 'grey area' ones.


----------



## rmelly (20 Jan 2009)

mercman said:


> Well you could give them the same right by telling them of your intentions and the right to pay their debt or else posting it on the Web.


 
That's a start, but if they deny they owe the money, then do you publish or not? Surely it's difficult for a business or individual to prove they DON'T owe some other business money.


----------



## callybags (21 Jan 2009)

Why not use the tried and tested method of taking up trade references before extending credit to a new customer.


----------



## Caveat (21 Jan 2009)

callybags said:


> Why not use the tried and tested method of taking up trade references before extending credit to a new customer.


 
I had assumed that everyone does this anyway - no? 

It doesn't always work though - we have had glowing references for people who turned out to be chancers quite a few times.


----------



## bond-007 (21 Jan 2009)

> It doesn't always work though - we have had glowing references for people who turned out to be chancers quite a few times.


Yep. Those things are easy to make up anyways. So their value is limited on their own.


----------



## elgransenor (24 Jan 2009)

With the advent of ecommerce and internet,chat rooms,blogs etc. it is becoming more common for companies and individuals to bring legal proceedings for defamation,slander etc.

Once you publish,and you do this with a website,you are leaving yourself wide open to the same sanctions that the printed media would be subject to.


----------



## mercman (24 Jan 2009)

elgransenor said:


> Once you publish,and you do this with a website,you are leaving yourself wide open to the same sanctions that the printed media would be subject to.



But if you place the full facts in writing, i.e. the fact of a debt not been settled, how or why would or should someone issue proceedings.


----------



## elgransenor (24 Jan 2009)

How would the owner of the website know whether 2 parties had settled a dispute re a debt,entered into an arrangement to pay a regular sum?

The only debts he could be sure of are those entered in Stubbs and if a debt is satisfied then our website owner will only end up reflecting the facts published in Stubbs.

IMHO it is a potentially dangerous area for an individual to enter.


----------



## computerman (25 Jan 2009)

The problem is the length of time it takes to register a judgement.

What if the website was a private club that you had to apply to to be come a member? All the usual disclaimers etc etc.

I am aware of one guy that copied a .ie web site with a .com domain. He copied the .ie web site exactly, but on the front page stated that they were in financial difficulty. The site was hosted in the states by a company that says its in liquidation any time they receive a complaint.

After a couple of months he called the .ie company that owed him the money and pointed them in the direction of the .com web site.

After a series of letters to a box number in the states, he got 1/2 his money back.


----------

