Can you say whatever you like on social media? Well, if you diss a company or individual on a public platform, that can be defamation, but if your criticism is true and in the public interest or benefit, it is legally justified.
If more people knew that, they wouldn’t allow themselves to be intimidated by companies into removing their perfectly true and justified posts about their failure to deliver. Many people have told me that after leaving a negative but true account of their shoddy treatment on the likes of HelloPeter, the company concerned undertook to deliver the goods, but on condition that the negative post was removed. Or worse, the company threatened legal action of the grounds of defamation.
Updating a post to state that the company finally met their commitment is the right and fair thing to do, but being blackmailed or bullied into removing the entire post is totally unacceptable.
One local company has proudly adopted an extreme version of consumer censorship. Published on its website is Premium Steel’s “social media and associated publicity” policy, which makes for extraordinary reading.
“If any dispute arises between yourself and Premium Steel you shall not publicise any details in respect to such a dispute on any public platform, unless the text of what you are about to publish has been approved by Premium Steel or is done only after a South African court has ruled in your favour in a matter against Premium Steel, or the Consumer Commission or Ombudsman… has ruled the merits of your version of the dispute as a true reflection thereof.”
To say in your Ts&Cs that your customers are prohibited from airing their views on social media is absolutely ridiculous
— Emma Sadleir
If you dare to ignore these conditions, “you will remove the comment upon request from Premium Steel within 10 days of request… or [the company] will institute legal action against you for delictual damages”. Also, the company will refuse to deliver the ordered (and paid for) goods or issue a refund until the comment is removed.
And here’s the best part: “Upon written demand being sent to you to remove the offending comment after 10 days of failing to do so Premium Steel may allocate R1,000 per day in deductions from the order value to delictual damages”.
Despite those hefty threats, of the 55 HelloPeter reviews of the company in the past 12 months, 49 are scathing about its failure to deliver lockers, steel cupboards, filing cabinets and the like, many months after the orders were placed online, and paid for in full.
The owner of a Germiston business who asked to be identified only as Christina, didn’t air her gripe with Premium Steel on HelloPeter, but shared it with me in the hope that I could help. She paid the company R13,760 for lockers in early March, which have yet to be delivered. The initial delivery date Premium Steel gave her was April 5, with the advice that it was just an estimate. A very loose one, as it turns out.
On May 8, that delivery date was pushed out to May 24; the company cited “supply difficulties” but assured her that the lockers were “almost complete”. Christina’s patience is now at an end and she’s requested a refund. Premium Steel’s Ts&Cs reveal that she won’t be getting one in less than 30 days.
In an e-mail to the company, I ventured that it was not reasonable or legal to expect customers, who have paid in full, in advance, to be happy with an open-ended delivery arrangement. And it’s not legal either. Section 46 of the Electronic Communications and Transactions Act (ECTA) states that a supplier must execute an order within 30 days of receiving it, unless the parties have agreed otherwise.
None of those disgruntled Premium Steel customers have been able to visit the company’s premises because it does not reveal its physical address, in contravention of the ECTA. Responding, an unnamed Premium Steel representative said the company had been trading since 2018 and has delivered to thousands of customers, including “within the last few days”.
Last year’s load-shedding led to a decline in demand for the industrial products they supply and put the business in distress. As a result, the company changed its terms and conditions to help curb the “unjustified” negative reviews, with a view to rehabilitating the business.
“I am surprised more businesses have not done so,” I was told. “There are a variety of mechanisms available to consumers, including yourself, which involves scrutinising the facts before publishing. Websites are business destroyers and add no positive value to the country.”
There was no expression of regret or apology that many customers had paid considerable sums for goods they hadn’t received, many months later. Just this: “As the majority of our products are made to order, our delivery times may vary and sometimes need to be extended.”
Leading social media law expert Emma Sadleir said the company’s social media terms were outrageous. “The law in South Africa allows you to be extreme in your opinions as long as they are substantially true, honestly held and in the public interest. All customer experience does constitute public interest,” Sadleir said.
“So to say in your Ts&Cs that your customers are prohibited from airing their views on social media is absolutely ridiculous,” she said. “I would be very nervous about doing business with such a company even though such a term would not be upheld in a court because they are not in accordance with the law.”
Bottom line: before making an online purchase, check out its online reviews; make sure the supplied contact details are valid; be very wary if there’s no physical address and interrogate the Ts&Cs.
• Contact Knowler for advice with your consumer issues via e-mail consumer@knowler.co.za or on X (Twitter) @wendyknowler
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.