Thinking of buying a Bruder?

[tryagain]

There were others on that facie site complaining about problems with brand X and lack of action regards fixing them.

Fair enough, I only followed it for a very short time but got over it pretty quick.

The outcome of the court case points to someone who didn't desist when threatened with legal action.  It didn't mention whether the company did or didn't fix the problem(s) 1st reported that led to it all.

She got done for two things, one was for being in contempt of court (not shutting up when she was told to by the judge) and also injurious falsehood (BSing to the extent of you BSing costs someone else.)

[gronk]

injurious falsehood (BSing to the extent of you BSing costs someone else.)

A lot of things posted up on social media are allegations. Without the ability to back them up with fact, it's an allegation. In a court of law, it's bull sh*tting..

[Fizzie]

So if Bruder "lost" $375k in sales, what's that - 2 vans

[JusyApples]

So if Bruder "lost" $375k in sales, what's that - 2 vans

How do they prove that? Unless the buyer said they weren’t buying because of what was on Facebook or that is just their average sales for a certain period?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Spada]

Even if I was flush with funds, I wouldn't buy this X brand of camper because of their handling ( or lack of ) of this and other complaints.

Fair enough, and your entitled to take that point of view.

Not trying to challenge Gronk at all, but If I could perhaps throw a contrasting experience into the mix. My personal experience with the company owners at Bruder and with their previous company Conqueror Australia, was that their customer back-up was in my opinion outstanding.

I'd purchased a 3rd hand Conqureor and had a problem with the fridge slide. I was the 3rd owner (purchased privately) and 3 years out of warranty, and they fixed it for free. They were adamant that they wanted to stand behind their brand name. On two other occasions I had sought modifications, or wanted spare parts, and on each occasion my customer experience was great. I never hid the fact that I purchased mine from a private seller, but they still went what I consider to be above and beyond with their customer support.
http://www.myswag.org/index.php?topic=29241.msg455900#msg455900
http://www.myswag.org/index.php?topic=28369.msg602672#msg602672

The two brothers sold Conqueror Australia to start Bruder (hence the name) a few years ago. When we were looking to replace the Conqueror, we paid several visits to the Bruder factory to see first hand how they were built. I have nothing but praise for the way they dealt with us, and while in their factory witnessed first hand how they dealt with another customer post purchase working on some changes that the owner was wanting post purchase.

I dont lay claim to knowing any of the facts relating to this case or the aggrieved customers concerns which started it. All I'm saying is that my personal dealings with the company owners over a 5 year period have been polar opposite to what was portrayed in the original website and the lemon caravans group?

Cheers, Spada

[gronk]

. All I'm saying is that my personal dealings with the company owners over a 5 year period have been polar opposite to what was portrayed in the original website and the lemon caravans group?

Cheers, Spada

You would have more of an idea of what they are like as owners of a company.

But mud sticks, and mud usually doesn't get thrown for no reason. Most companies still don't realise the power of social media, which in this case could well be false accusations, but when a person goes to the trouble of posting up problems with a van, at best, I'd say the company handled the problem badly.

[CTL]

You would have more of an idea of what they are like as owners of a company.

But mud sticks, and mud usually doesn't get thrown for no reason. Most companies still don't realise the power of social media, which in this case could well be false accusations, but when a person goes to the trouble of posting up problems with a van, at best, I'd say the company handled the problem badly.

But, and it is a BIG but, that disgruntled customer posted up ONLY one side of the story, his.

In my experience, there two side to EVERY story and somewhere in between is the truth.

You, gronk, are making assumptions, like every other internet expert, based upon snippets of selective information you have read and chosen to retain.

[gronk]

But, and it is a BIG but, that disgruntled customer posted up ONLY one side of the story, his.



You, gronk, are making assumptions, like every other internet expert, based upon snippets of selective information you have read and chosen to retain.

BUT, why would a customer post up anything if he wasn't disgruntled about something ? His side of the story was photos of things that were broken or didn't work. Why the company didn't rectify those problems I have no idea.

Of course I'm making assumptions. If I knew the whole truth, I'd post up the truth !!

[alnjan]

BUT, why would a customer post up anything if he wasn't disgruntled about something ? His side of the story was photos of things that were broken or didn't work. Why the company didn't rectify those problems I have no idea.

Of course I'm making assumptions. If I knew the whole truth, I'd post up the truth !!

Wasn't his issues addressed by Bruder, finally, which lead him to remove his post, however she by that stage had reposted and kept reposting, which led to the action being taken against her?

[gronk]

Wasn't his issues addressed by Bruder, finally, which lead him to remove his post, however she by that stage had reposted and kept reposting, which led to the action being taken against her?

I don't know about him. I didn't hear how it panned out.

[Bird]

Cant see this thread achieving anything more

[tryagain]

I don't know about him. I didn't hear how it panned out.

I am assuming he either listened to his lawyers or had enough commonsense to know to be quiet once the legal proceedings started.

https://magazine.rvdaily.com.au/en_US/15011/221239/van_buyer_sued_after_negative_review_.html

BUT, why would a customer post up anything if he wasn't disgruntled about something ? His side of the story was photos of things that were broken or didn't work. Why the company didn't rectify those problems I have no idea.

Of course I'm making assumptions. If I knew the whole truth, I'd post up the truth !!

Here is purely a hypothetical,
Someone buys a van to travel Australia with their wife as it is what she wants to do, she then tragically passes before they have the opportunity to do so. The Van has a few issues after delivery, but instead of pushing for them to be rectified, he decides to try to make them seem like, on the whole a major fault, to then have the manufacturer have to give a refund as opposed to have them repaired and then have to sell it second hand at a substantial financial loss. When it doesn't look like they are going to play ball, he decides to make a website with a few half truths and exaggerations to then try and force their hand, but instead is then taken to court and found guilty of injurious falsehoods due to being a bit too liberal with what he has claimed.

This is purely a hypothetical that could equally explain events, not trying to cast aspersions on anyone.

[Spada]

Details of the case brought against the lemons are on public record - https://archive.sclqld.org.au/qjudgment/2019/QDC19-116.pdf

Cant find anything about the original owner that was the catalyst of the lemons drama's?

[tryagain]

Cant find anything about the original owner that was the catalyst of the lemons drama's?

Not a link to the public record but there is a screenshot in the article I linked above about it that might lead you in the right direction.

[wasn]

All I can say is that Bruder people need a lesson in pointy end sales PR when you sell a car/boat/van at the absolute pointy end the product only represent merely half of the price and service/back up good will/good resales makes up the rest.
Oh well, there has never been a case that ends well where a manufacture goes after a customer or critic, disregarding how toxic and dubious the claims are.

[CTL]

Oh well, there has never been a case that ends well where a manufacture goes after a customer or critic, disregarding how toxic and dubious the claims are.

Gee, I’m not so sure.  Think there were quite a few people rooting for Bruder in the hope that they bought the toxic Ms Leigh down, and they did, so I hope it is onwards and upwards for them.

[gronk]

All I can say is that Bruder people need a lesson in pointy end sales PR when you sell a car/boat/van at the absolute pointy end the product only represent merely half of the price and service/back up good will/good resales makes up the rest.
Oh well, there has never been a case that ends well where a manufacture goes after a customer or critic, disregarding how toxic and dubious the claims are.

I would agree.  Even if you win a court case, the mud has usually already stuck.

[CTL]

I would agree.  Even if you win a court case, the mud has usually already stuck.

Yes, I agree but in this case of Bruder vs Ms Leigh it was not a case of the manufacturer taking action against a disgruntled customer BUT instead a manufacturer taking action against a toxic, delusional, disability pensioner, who thought she was some self appointed crusader, who was spreading lies and defaming them.

[sparksy]

Ms Leigh has won her appeal against her loss to Bruder with the appeals court awarding her costs as well.
The appeals court basically found that her intent wasnt to maliciously financially damage  Bruder , and that Bruder failed to prove a financial damage. Also they cant have another go at her because of th way they presented their case this time around.
https://archive.sclqld.org.au/qjudgment/2020/QCA20-246.pdf?fbclid=IwAR0JV0Op7opukeeE6yQSE3oGD5iaDtURbRWgJUFCBy_rWMvR572XEwS5MwU

[rags]

Ms Leigh has won her appeal against her loss to Bruder with the appeals court awarding her costs as well.
The appeals court basically found that her intent wasnt to maliciously financially damage  Bruder , and that Bruder failed to prove a financial damage. Also they cant have another go at her because of th way they presented their case this time around.
https://archive.sclqld.org.au/qjudgment/2020/QCA20-246.pdf?fbclid=IwAR0JV0Op7opukeeE6yQSE3oGD5iaDtURbRWgJUFCBy_rWMvR572XEwS5MwU

Good outcome for the Appellant with a 3-0 decision. Although the Justice excluded opportunity for a re-trial ( in the Supreme Court) it would not extinguish the opportunity of the Respondent to seek a hearing in the High Court.

[tryagain]

Ms Leigh has won her appeal against her loss to Bruder with the appeals court awarding her costs as well.

Is she refunding all those who she convinced to donate towards her legal expenses?