Couple whose credit rating was destroyed by bad online review win £176,000 compensation
The couple in Utah were told they broke a 'non-disparagement clause'
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.A couple whose bad review of a US shopping website saw their credit rating destroyed have won more than $300,000 (£176,000) in compensation.
Jen Palmer and her husband John tried to buy two Christmas presents for their son from gadget site Kleargear in 2009 and when they did not arrive, they posted a review on a forum called Ripoff Report.
According to Sky, Mr Palmer received an email three years later demanding the review be taken down within 72 hours of that he pay $3,500 (£2,057).
Their credit rating was destroyed when they refused to pay the fine and they were unable to buy a house, car or receive loans.
Kleargear claimed the couple had violated a “non-disparagement clause” of its terms of service but it did not appear in conditions they agreed to when placing their order.
Their lawyer, Scott Michelman, told Sky: “It's a classic public citizen case in that it's a big corporate bully trying to pressure ordinary people into silence.”
Kleargear did not attend court in Utah on Wednesday and a judge awarded damages without ruling on whether the so-called “non-disparagement clause” was legal.
Leaving the court, Mr Palmer told a local television channel: "I'm so happy that this whole thing is over. The main thing I want is this never to happen to other people."
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments