Liability for Defamation Over a Negative Online Product Review

[jjhenderson71]

My question involves defamation in the state of: California

I was threatened by a company’s law firm via a letter a few days back because I had threatened to post negative reviews about their product online if they did not repair their product that is installed at my home.

Because of the situation I won’t post specifics about the company or product in this forum, but here is the overview:
We purchased the product and had it installed at our house about 2 years ago. It cost roughly 7k. We have had 11 distinct issues with it breaking down and needing repair. The quality of the product is terrible and the service has been even worse.
The first few issues were repaired by the company without any issues, but eventually they started to refuse and we only got them to complete the repair after threatening to sue them for a defective product. I recently requested that the product be removed from my house and a full refund be provided. The company did not respond but instead had their law firm respond. The law firm rejected our request for refund and removal and also threatened to sue us for defamation if we posted negative feedback online.

Here is what I have done in response: I created my own website and posted it online. It already comes up on the first page of Google if you type [company name] review. The website has photos and videos of the issues we have had with the product. It states no opinion or any assessment about product quality, service etc. It is just a list of issues, each with a photo or video and a short explanation of the problem. It also states the response of the company which in most cases was that they have agreed to repair.

Am I playing with fire or am I within my rights? If anyone would be willing to review the site, please let me know and I would be happy to send a link. Should I pay a lawyer to review the site to make sure?
Any help would be greatly appreciated!

[lawaholic]

You could potentially be playing with fire here, especially since they have already hired legal assistance. I'm not a lawyer, so I can't advise you in that respect, but as a "normal person" that's been burned before, I would think that you are within your rights and it's not defamation if everything you have posted is true and not exaggerated in any way. However, since the company has hired a law firm to handle their end of the issue, you probably need to hire one at this point as well if you intend on pursuing the refund request.

[Foster_Foster]

We can't know what kind of warranty this product provided or what the state consumer protection division folks have to say on the topic of this product, if anything, so we can't know whether it was a silly thing to demand a full refund years later despite it's lemon-y status.

It was a bad idea to threaten them with X "if" they didn't do Y; they're free to see that as blackmail. You either share your story as a public service to educate other consumers, or you don't.

"It states no opinion or any assessment about product quality, service etc."

You're free to state your opinion.

"Am I playing with fire or am I within my rights?"

Both.

"Should I pay a lawyer to review the site to make sure?"

Up to you.

[Who'sThatGuy]

I think your within a safe boundary if what you say is true and accurate about the company's product.

However, if this company plans to sue you in court, you will need to defend yourself, and doing so isn't free.

Corporations have a full time legal team, they pay this legal team so bringing you to court isn't free for them ether. But there pockets are way deeper then yours and that can make your life miserable.

[LawResearcherMissy]

However, since the company has hired a law firm to handle their end of the issue, you probably need to hire one at this point as well if you intend on pursuing the refund request.

I doubt very much that this company has hired a law firm soled to deal with this issue. Most large businesses have a legal department as a matter of course.

As far as threatening to sue for defamation, let them threaten. Companies count of people being afraid of the word "sue" - and with good reason. If you look around here, you'll find hundreds of people freaking the hell out because someone threatened suit. Being sued only means that the other party is asking the court to assign a judge to get to the bottom of an argument. That's it. Suing and prevailing are two different things.

Telling the truth is not defamation. Writing publicly and displaying photos of the product, say, catching fire 10 times, is not defamation if the product actually caught fire 10 times.