Tim has contacted me. He has sent 3 private messages to me today. The first was his account of events and he asked me if they were accurate. In my opinion they were not. I told him as the word slander had been thrown around earlier that I did not feel comfortable talking about details. He replied that he wanted a dialogue. I replied with my account of events. He has since asked that I have a conference call with him, Barry (the person who installed my Ston Gard) and Bill Shores (the national installer "who doesn't work for Ston Gard"). I am uncomfortable with this. With this "slander" issue still floating around, I don't feel that I am free to discuss this matter openly.

 

Maybe you should contact your attorney? Looks like you may have no other choice. You gotta fight fire with fire. Obviously they plan on making this as difficult as possible for you. If they were reasonable you'd have had your lights and the whole thing would have been over........

Stupid people Suck.. oops.. did I just slander someone!!

 

SCS2K,

Man, this is getting nasty! Even though I feel and have stated that some of the failure theories bandied were incorrect and I have put forth my own theories, I doubt this forum will solve the problem.

I'm not an attorney (maybe someone here is and can clarify) but I think what does it hurt to "talk" with SG and the others in a conference call? You don't have to commit to anything but without some form of communication you and SG can never come to a solution. Surely, neither party wants to mess with the court system.

Am I right: It's only slander if what one said was untrue and malicious. If it turns out what one stated was incorrect and retracts then there is no slander and we all learn something.

Even though many of us disagree on varying topics on this forum I believe we all want to discover the truth to further our knowledge about the cars we love. This can't be done without dialogue and the occasional disagreements.

Good luck!

[Edited by babylou on 05-24-2001 at 10:13 PM]

 

I repeat! If StonGard really cared about what SCS2K had to say they would have done something long before now. Why should he speak to them without proper representation? Why do they all 3 need to have a conference call with him? Can the CEO not make a decision or would they really like to try and convince him they are right and he is wrong. I think the conference call is a bunch of BS. The facts as they see them and the facts as SCS2K see them are very clear. They just aren't the same! I think he needs someone on his side that knows his rights and can help him resolve this matter ASAP! It's obvious StonGard isn't interested in a speedy resolution or they would have handled it a week ago!

Just my opinion......

 

I wouldn't particpipate in a conference call where all other participants are from the "other" side. If you choose to participate make sure you have some people from "your" side who can corroborate anything stated on the call. You might even want to get everyone's consent and tape the call so there's no misrepresentation of what was said on the conference call. I'd be skeptical and ask Tim what he expects to gain from this conference call. It seems like most, if not all, of the facts are on the table.

 

IMO, this is a trap. The other two are witnesses. I agree with the previous poster -- the CEO should have handled this on his own already. If you do participate in this call, have a few board members participate, too. They can be your witnesses. Pick mature people of high moral character and objectivity.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Sunchild
[B]IMO, this is a trap.

 

Hey Greg. I understand that you there are times for levity and all, but if you don't want to be constructive when someone is actually seeking advice on a serious matter just shut your damn mouth. You just discourage those of us who like to help people with actual problems.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Strike
[B]Hey Greg.

 

Greg,

I agree that many of the posts in this thread are just conjecture and speculation. You'll notice that none of my posts have placed blame on one side or the other. However, when one of the participants in the volley suggests a conference call with several of his people and ONLY the other participant then I have a problem with that. I think you should too.
It's easy for you, who doesn't have broken headlights such that the car can't or shouldn't be driven at night and probably looks like crap, to act like it's no big deal. You do that a lot when other people are having problems and you don't see their point of view. You like to toss your two cents in on threads you don't care about but when others put theirs in on threads and you think they are being unfair you chastise them. Freakin' hypocrite. You tell us to shut our mouths and skip threads if we're not constructive or don't care but the next time you think about that look in the mirror and think of this thread.
I'm glad you think there's nothing constructive here. Then maybe you shouldn't be reading it. I suggest you consider the possibility that you have no FREAKIN' clue and MAYBE there IS something constructive here and you just don't realize it. In any event, if the person who has the problem thinks there's something constructive isn't that enough? Or would you prefer that everyone here decides in each thread whether it's constructive, and if each of us decides it isn't we make fun of the situation as you seem to think is appropriate in this case?