The bottom feeders behind c4g will screw themselves... waiting for it... waiting for it...

@summerbee: RipOffreport accepts payoffs from companies to bury negative comments and post positive comments in exchange.

Hey Ben - If you want to start a paypall donation bucket for the legal team of Liberis and Nephew I'll pitch in $10 or $20. I think this is an important issue.

When it came to the Cash4Gold articles I just skipped over them thinking they were just about consumers complaining about the company.

After actually reading everything about it I am happy I read the consumerist. That was very good reporting and I will definitely keep checking back for updates.

You're supposed to specify payment and instructions. I just took a chance and asked for a check for whatever they assayed. I got back a pretty detailed breakdown of materials, weight, purity and how they arrived at the settlement along with that meaty check. All told it took less than a week, including USPS back and forth. I couldn't recommend them more highly.

Consumerist is right though this is a pretty big issue, and it seems like C4G just wants to win, and that means picking on the weakest target.

Maybe I am wrong.

Legal intimidation is for crooks.

It was clear from the start that their lawyers didn't.

Intertubes 1
cash4gold 0

I feel bad for people that are dumb enough to use the service. "Wow, my ex told me he bought that gold chain for $300, but you guys say it's only worth $12? I guess I got suckered, that no good cheater was a liar too!" Actually no, you are the sucker, and the pawn shop would give you $60 for it. Just spend $2 in gas and head on over.

Translation: Either their lawyers now realize that they can't win the claims filed against Consumerist, or they managed to convince their clients that they couldn't possibly win this one.

I'm sure the judge (assuming he knew about the plaintiff's counsel threatening prison time) wasn't very pleased with them, either.

@MostlyHarmless: OMG! Too soon!

Think they might get the message?

Finally Cash4Gold realized that under freedom of the press it was silly to name Consumerist.com as a defendant.

@Coelacanth: It's also not slander if it's borderline indecipherable.

The way I see it is that good (decent/moral/etc) companies will address complaints, bad companies sue in the hopes that the complainers will turn tail and run. It's quite sad and shows a companies true colors.

I've been in the "hot seat" a couple of times and I stood my ground, regardless of legal threats. I am still batting 1,000.

(ahem)
As you were, gentlepeople... As you were.

Continue the good job.

Though I can spell it if you want...

@summerbee:

Ripoffreport.com?

ROR verifying a company or not verifying a company is totally meaningless.

**Above paragraph is purely my opinions and does not represent facts, dictated but not read. If you sue me I have no money in my accounts so do not bother.

phew, maybe people should post on blogs using disclaimers and what not.....

They are running scared with their tails between their legs. Take that Cash4Gold. Intertubes 1, Cash4Gold Zero.

Also, Big C's online reach cant be good PR either.

@henrygates: It's not slander if it's true.

It's a civil version of malicious prosecution.

@NoNamesLeft: This blog's owner is a not-for-profit organization. They're not making money from these stories or their sources.

Hehe, I told him the truth, then said I had not gold to sell, that I wouldnt through them, and to take me off their calling list.

Here's some more info about it: [en.wikipedia.org]

[www.ripoffreport.com]

Looks like if any given consumer wants to criticize them on ripoffreport.com now, their comments will be buried under an elaborate paragraph or two about Cash4Gold's supposed happygoodtime customer service.

Not good.

I hope Jeff Aronson also plans to drop that dog from his dinner plans.. because that picture has "ominous" written all over it.