BBB Under Scrutiny

Link: http://www.bbbroundup.com/bbbsucks.html

After years of criticism, numerous court cases, and anti-BBB websites, the CBBB (Council of Better Business Bureaus) finally admits what we've known all along. They SUCK.

Finally, the BBB is starting with truth.

Maybe the BBB should stay away with duties that begin with the Letter "A" like algorithm and arbitration. They can't seem to get either right. Here's the response filed by a company to a recent arbitration decision by the North Carolina Better Business Bureau. I couldn't improve on anything in the company's response so here it runs unedited. So sit back, take your time, read it through and then decide in your own mind, if you were Judge Judy how would you rule?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear editor,

You mentioned that you were working on a new wave of complaints. I hope I can make it. The following attachment is a copy of the appeal that I am sending to the BBB in upstate South Carolina. I pray that God will soften their hearts and let them see things more clearly. Otherwise, they will be driving yet another nail in the coffin of another honest businessman.

By reading this appeal, you should begin to see the errors the BBB has made that range from a lack of good observation to the very inept. In their letters they keep asking me to prove that I have all my required licenses. Someone needs to start asking them if they have a license to practise law. By even the casual observation of a paralegal, they have much to learn.

Note that I hide the name of the "plaintiff" in this case. I believe it to be best not to name them in this public way right now. My beef at the moment is with the BBB.

The case is currently in appeals. By you posting this, I hope that the BBB will feel the pressure to give me a fair decision. And if they don't, I have other plans brewing, but nothing is a sure thing.

Sincerely,

Larry Leitgeb
120 Old Leonard Road
Woodruff, SC 29388

May 21, 2010

Linda J. Bentley, Dispute Resolution Director
Better Business Bureau of Upstate South Carolina
408 North Church Street, Suite C
Greenville, SC 29601-2164

Dear Linda J. Bentley,

1. This appeal is an amended version to the one presented on April 19th. The arbitration occurred on March 23rd.

2. In the arbitrators Reasons for Decision, they state, “Although the contractor took exception to the interior finish being out of the contractual agreement, he did testify that there was as much as 20% remaining incomplete on this job.” I suspect that they calculated something close to 20% of the original contract price of $69,000 to come up with a number like $12,969.

3. Go back and listen to the “transcript.” The only reference to 80% that I made was in reference to the claim that I completed 80% of the work IN RESPECT TO THE LAST 5% OF THE CONTRACT!

4. Here are the recalculated figures:
Original contracted price: $69,000
Amount due Leitgeb at 95% completion: $65,550
Amount Remaining due Leitgeb: $ 3,450
80% of Remaining 5%: $ 2,760

5. The ZZZZZZZs are obligated to pay Leitgeb the sum of $2,760.00. This is determined by the methods the arbitrators used in their earlier calculation, except that they were wrong in their assumptions used in their calculations.

6. What kind of training is required before the BBB qualifies a person to represent them as an arbitrator?

7. The contract between myself and Mr. and Mrs. Zzzzzzzz states the following:

8. The interior surface is sprayed concrete; it is concrete gray in color and may be varied. Care is taken to make it as acceptable as is reasonable. The interior surface is not represented to be architectural but structural. If the owner determines that additional finishing is needed, it will be done at an additional cost.

9. This contract was presented at the arbitration. The Zzzzzzzzs did not dispute the contract.

10. Did the arbitrators read the contract?

11. The arbitrators representing the BBB of Greenville have failed to understand the essentials of the rule of law in decision number three. These are their own words:

12. The business will not be awarded the remainder of the contract fee or the additional materials cost sought in the Agreement to Arbitrate, since the contracted job was not satisfactorily completed and the added material costs were not presented in a timely manner.

13. I would ask that the arbitrators give me a definition for their phrase “timely manner,” one that would hold up in court. I would also ask to be shown where in the contract between myself and Mr. and Mrs. Zzzzzzzz do they find the phrase “timely manner.” The contract between myself and Mr. and Mrs. Zzzzzzzz specifically states that the customer is responsible for all materials. Any materials that I lay out on their behalf needs to be compensated. That is the rule of law. That is the contract.

14. Moreover, should I have presented the two months of material costs after Mr. Zzzzzzzz
adamantly proclaimed that he had no intention of paying? As I testified, I presented one or two material invoices that Mr. Zzzzzzzz refused to pay. I presented July's invoice in August. In October, he filed suit and openly declared that he had no intentions of paying. Is two months considered to be “not presented in a timely manner?” Perhaps it was the arbitration itself that was “not presented in a timely manner.”

15. The arbitrators did not acknowledge in their “Reasons for Decision” the verbal agreement I had with Mr. Zzzzzzzz. I agreed to buy Mr. Zzzzzzzz two new windows (at a cost of $1,600). Mr. Zzzzzzzz agreed to let me have the old ones. What part of this verbal agreement is “not presented in a timely manner”?

16. After the arbitrators announced that the meeting had gone on long past five o'clock and closed the meeting, the Zzzzzzzzs asked if they could leave an abundance of information, including more pictures and videos, as long as these items could be returned to them. My wife heard the arbitrator reply, “We will submit it into evidence, but understand that we may not have time to get to all of it because of the amount of information you have submitted.”

17. It is wrong for the board to allow Mr. and Mrs. Zzzzzzzz to stay and continue to offer testimony and evidence when the meeting was officially called to a close. It is wrong to continue to accept evidence without both parties present so that the other party is allowed to review said evidence and comment. I should be able to appeal on this issue alone.

18. It is wrong for the board of arbitrators to not give the opposing party an opportunity to comment on any alleged evidence presented at the meeting. The format of the meeting was extremely irregular. The Zzzzzzzzs presented so many pictures, the majority of which were meaningless to me. It was never said that such and such a picture reveals such and such and the picture presented to me as evidence of such. One arbitrator even asked the question, “What are you trying to show in this picture?”

19. The Arbitrators state in their Reasons for decision the following:

20. Although the arbitrators were not able to visit the site, the customer provided several
pictures, brochures and some web site information available at the hearing, characterizing the progress of that job and comparative conditions for this type of structure. The business did not refute this evidence.

21. If I did not refute this evidence, as testified by the arbitrators above, then I did not confirm it either. I was never asked to confirm or deny any picture except one. I was not told what I was to refute or deny in any given picture except one.

22. The one picture I was asked to comment on by the arbitrator sitting closest to the Zzzzzzzzs was a picture of some wrinkles on the outside of the dome. I explained that wrinkles are an inherent part of Monolithic Dome technology. I also explained to the arbitrator that he was looking at a window augment, not some large blister.

23. I ask the arbitrators, “How did you determine that these pictures were taken after the second and final shooting of concrete? I ask the arbitrators, “How did you determine whether or not the lighting was skewed in such a way to exaggerate any dips in the walls, lighting that would be unnatural to any finished room?” Of the two pictures I did see, Mr. and Mrs. Zzzzzzzz was still speaking and I would have spoken out of turn to give my opinion.

24. Did the arbitrators read the letters submitted by the Zzzzzzzzs up to this point? Did they read my reply to these accusations? If so, were they not able to see how slanted the Zzzzzzzzs presented their information?

25. The Arbitrators write in their Reasons for Decision, “Since the parties remained at an impasse over the remaining issues, the customer terminated the relationship in October 2009 without submitting the final payment.” First note that the arbitrators acknowledge that the customer did not submit the final payment, yet this fact is not reflected in their calculations. Second, note that the arbitrators acknowledge that it was the customer that terminated the relationship.

26. The second issue above is important because the contract specifically says, “Leitgeb Industries obligation is limited to repair of the defect or refund of the purchase price, whichever is appropriate in Leitgeb Industries' opinion.” This is the same contract that was presented at the arbitration.

27. I ask that the Better Business Bureau explain the following statement from page 9 of their Dispute Resolution pamphlet:

28. The following remedies may be awarded in an arbitration proceeding: … d) the amount
of any actual out of pocket loss or property damage, not to exceed $2,500, caused by the
provision of the service.

29. There is now new information that was not available at the time of the arbitration and I am demanding an appeal. Larry Yyyyy, who offered testimony at the arbitration, was given a job at South Industries. This is a conflict of interest that Larry Yyyyy did not reveal when he gave his testimony.

This alone should render the hearing a mistrial.

30. I remind the arbitrators that Larry Yyyyy did not even reveal his former relationship to me. This only came out through questioning and my comments.

31. I remind the BBB of Greenville that the arbitrators make reference to this witness's testimony in the second paragraph on page one of their Reasons for Decision. I also note that they make no reference to my objections at the meeting that this man was fired by me or that his son threatened to kill me.

32. There is a reason why the law frowns on a former worker testifying against his employer.

33. In the video evidence that the Zzzzzzzzs submitted, Mrs. Denise M. Zzzzzzzz states, “Bare
wood is showing and this is the finished product.” (I have no idea if this video was part of the arbitrators decision because this evidence was submitted after the meeting was formally brought to a close, but because the BBB has it in their possession, I must assume that the arbitrators viewed it.) This wood is exposed to receive the second floor joists. Their carpenter gave me a compliment on this shelf because he knows how much more difficult it would be to secure a second floor without it.

34. In the same video evidence that the Zzzzzzzzs submitted, I noticed that the Zzzzzzzzs focus on the back bedroom wall and the attic space. (I have no idea if this video was part of the arbitrators decision because this evidence was submitted after the meeting was formally brought to a close, but because the BBB has it in their possession, I must assume that the arbitrators viewed it.) I wish to draw to your attention that the viewer never sees the front door (except inadvertently at a sharp angle). This is because I focused my energy spraying the living room - kitchen area and this area is looking pretty
good. All my other customers prefer that I spend their money focusing on the areas where visitors will see when they walk in the front door, not the attic space. The fact that the Zzzzzzzzs intentionally and willfully avoid this videoing this wall is a testament to their attempt to obstruct justice.

35. If this legal action had been brought to a Court of Law, the plaintiff would have been required to “lay on the table” all available evidence prior to the actual trial. This is done to prevent the plaintiff from blitzkrieging through the defense. “There is no legal action by ambush in this country,” as my lawyer friend used to say. Being upfront about the evidence would prevent errors like the two above.

36. Over and over again Mr. and Mrs. Zzzzzzzz claim that the mudroom walls are off by three
inches. I remember cringing at the arbitration because although I remembered the mudroom walls leaning out 3/4's of an inch, I wondered if my memory was wrong. Apparently not. After carefully reviewing all of the evidence that the Zzzzzzzzs submitted, I am unable to find a single shred of evidence that the walls are three inches out of line. They do not verify this on the video. They do not verify this in pictures. There is no tape measure held up to the wall. No level. No plumb bob. Yet this became a main focus of their arguments at the arbitration, and also in the video “evidence” they submitted. Remember that Mr. Zzzzzzzz testified at the beginning of the arbitration that he had experience in construction. Does he not know how to use the tools mentioned above?

37. The bottom line is that Zzzzzzzz's received a fair home for a fair price. Adding all the receipts Mr. Zzzzzzzz offered as evidence, I come up with $18,025.53. Add another $3,500, which is the normal amount people pay for doors and windows on a house this size, and we have a cost of $21,525.53. Now add my contract price of $69,000 and we have $90,525.53. This is considered by many to be about the ½ way point in the construction of a dome. It generally costs just about the same amount to frame it, install the wiring, plumbing, sheet rock, and everything but the appliances as it does to get the shell to this point. $120 a square foot is a very good price for a home that is sure to last 200 years with minimum maintenance. This price even beats the cost of many conventional houses. Furthermore nobody deserves to get a house 10 % below market price at the expense of a subcontractor
because of cosmetic issues.

38. I realize that dome homes must all be new to you. Perhaps you were influenced by the
Zzzzzzzzs to think that faint impressions of rebar was the worst thing that could happen to shotcrete. I assure you, all my customers before and after have faint impressions of rebar in their homes. Mr. and Mrs. Zzzzzzzz was just the first to have a fit over it. As David South of Monolithic domes says, “Scrapping the excess concrete off of the rebar entails a lot of time and a lot of waste.” All my customers until now have been reasonable people who were not willing to pay for waste. In Mr. Zzzzzzzz's own testimony, he states that he and his wife visited a dome I was building near Tallahassee. How can it be that they did not know what to expect? Or are they using the BBB to get something for free?

Sincerely,
Larry Leitgeb
CC: Doug Jones, Esq.

Link: http://www.bbbroundup.com

Interesting story about the BBB Defense as used by Glenn Beck and Bill O'Reilly to justify their support of Goldline International, Inc.

EDITORIAL
A Real Slapp In The Face Of Justice (And Common Sense)

Consider the basic thought behind the anti-SLAPP motion. It was designed to protect the little guy, like a whistle blower against having to carry the burden of prohibitive legal fees in their quest for justice.

For over a decade, the Better Business Bureau of Los Angeles has used the anti-SLAPP defense to ward off lawsuits by small businesses claiming they have been libeled by unjustified bad grades from the LA BBB.

This interpretation of the anti-SLAPP laws means that for the small business, trying to inform the public of the lack of merits inherent in the BBB Letter Grading System (in this scenario, it's the small business who is the whistle blower), they need to have around $1,000,000 in the bank to fund the legal fees...$500,000 for their lawyer, plus $500,000 for the Better Business Bureau (upon inevitably losing to the BBB on the anti-SLAPP motion, the plaintiff, or small business, is required to pay legal fees for the defendant, or the BBB ) in order to get to the appeal stage of fighting the anti-SLAPP. Up to this point, the small business has yet to even get their day in court.

But what choice does a small business have when faced with the fact that a disparaging grade from the LA BBB is costing them $400,000 in revenues annually? Both the Los Angeles BBB and the CBBB (the national organization) flat out refuse to even enter into a dialogue on the grading issue.

Currently, the courts have ruled that small business has no legal right to challenge a disparaging grade from the BBB, at least in Los Angeles. This must change, as no one entity, such as the LA BBB, should be above the law, a status that ironically the courts have empowered them with. The BBB grades themselves have been shown to be full of error, with numerous documented corrections, especially when called out by the media.

This means the anti-SLAPP, designed to protect the little guy (small business) from punitive legal fees, as currently viewed by the Los Angeles Courts, does exactly the opposite.

Where's the justice in that?

Link: http://www.bbbroundup.com

bbbRoundup turns one year old today. We thought we'd take some time to reflect on the past year.

In January of 2009 the Better Business Bureau rolled out their new Letter Grading System on a national scale. The media outcry was predictable. Short lived criticism before moving on to the next story. This reporter thought the story had legs, and that's when bbbRoundup was born.

Originally, this website was designed to house a ten part investigative report on the Los Angeles Better Business Bureau. Quickly, the story grew to include the Better Business Bureau (CBBB and all the member BBB offices )itself. Recently, the story has grown to include the Canadian BBB. Here is some of what we uncovered in the past year.

- The Letter Grade System was conceived and tested by William Mitchell of the Los Angeles BBB before being adopted by the National BBB.

- The Los Angeles BBB has patent rights on their letter grade algorithm.

- The Los Angeles BBB generates more revenues than any other local office, and by a large margin.

- The Letter Grade System of the BBB has been shown to be completely ridiculous on multiple occasions.

- The BBB makes judgments on businesses they know nothing about.

- The BBB is not a member of the Better Business Bureau

- If you are in certain businesses, you can do no better than an "F" grade.

- Graded by their own system, the BBB earns an "F" grade.

- The next William Mitchell project is TrustLink, now being tested by the Los Angeles BBB and five other regional BBB offices. It is setup as a for profit corporation and owned by the Los Angeles BBB (William Mitchell) and the other five participating regional BBB offices. There is a lot of prime space on the Los Angeles BBB website, a not-for-profit corporation, given to TrustLink. This comes real close to conflict of interest.

- The type of business the Better Business Bureau operates as is a boiler room telemarketing company that sells memberships and grades. (Yes, you do get a better grade if you pay to join the BBB ). They have made clear by their actions that they have no interest in protecting the consumer or playing the role of a consumer advocacy organization. It makes one wonder if they really qualify for their not-for-profit tax status.

- The complaint system which is the "prime feature" of the BBB Letter Grade System is seriously flawed. There are too many reports of favoritism shown members in the complaint process. Non-members have reported multiple cases of their responses to complaints getting mislaid by the BBB. The BBB does not factor in the size of business, or number of transactions, when assigning a business' complaint score.

- Multiple websites have sprung up decrying the tactics used by the BBB to allegedly extort membership dues from businesses.

- This reporter remains mystified as to why the Better Business Bureau chooses to employ the Tiger Woods' PR strategy when faced with these news stories. Is the BBB so arrogant they think we will all go away?

- Law suits are appearing with more frequency with cases in the last year in Los Angeles (on appeal of anti-SLAPP); North Carolina (ruled against BBB in out of court settlement); Minnesota (just going to court). There are also increased rumblings of multiple class action suits against the BBB.

We look forward to providing continued coverage of the "Investigation of the Better Business Bureau," both our own stories and those that represent the best of my colleagues across North America.

Link: http://www.bbbroundup.com

With the regular season winding down we thought we'd take a look at the Better Business Bureau's scouting reports for the top contending teams in the Eastern and Western Conferences of the NBA. As usual, there's not a lot of consistency between the various BBB Franchises. It appears, from this sample at any rate, that paying the BBB to join guarantees an A+, while the best you can do if you don't elect to pay the toll is a grade of a B. And pity the poor team who fails to respond to the BBB about a single complaint. That's good enough for a D-.

So let's size up the competition and show you the BBB scouting reports in the Eastern Conference, a race dominated by Cleveland, Orlando, Atlanta and Boston.

Now let's check out the Western Conference where only two teams really have a chance, the Denver Nuggets and the Los Angeles Lakers.