Barrett-Jackson Lawsuit

[tirebird]

Received the following email just a short time ago from Sports Car Market Magazine.


SCM received the following press release moments ago. It is reprinted here in its entirety.


SCOTTSDALE, ARIZ. MARCH 16, 2007 - Late yesterday Barrett-Jackson Auction Co. LLC filed suit in U.S. District Court in relation to a situation that occurred at the company's January 2007 Scottsdale event.

A consignor, apparently unhappy with the $300,000 sale price of his vehicle, placed chains and locks on the vehicle after it crossed the auction block and was sold, while it sat in the area where featured auction cars were displayed. He posted multiple notices on the vehicle claiming that the sale was void due to claimed "auction irregularities," and published other false and defamatory statements about Barrett-Jackson in view of the company's customers and the thousands of patrons attending the event. Barrett-Jackson's internal legal and security teams, and the Scottsdale Police Department, responded to the incident and documented the damage.

An ongoing internet smear campaign has stemmed from this seller dispute, with numerous defamatory rumors and untrue statements being published to websites and online chat rooms viewed by the company's core customer base. In particular, an untrue, derogatory and defamatory "article" referring to the above incident has made its way onto more than 20 automotive-related online "blogs" and discussion boards frequented by thousands of classic car enthusiasts around the world.

Barrett-Jackson filed its lawsuit in order to protect its 36-year reputation and business interests by seeking to correct the untrue information that has been published, and by filing suit against the responsible party on six separate counts, including defamation and breach of contract.

Barrett-Jackson constantly strives to maintain the utmost ethical standards in all the company's operations and activities. The company recognizes that not every customer will be happy with the result of every auction sale, and the Barrett-Jackson team values thoughtful, well-informed feedback.

However, Barrett-Jackson takes the company's business reputation very seriously, and will do whatever is necessary to defend against unfounded claims. Copies of the lawsuit can be obtained by contacting the clerk of the U.S. District Court in Phoenix or at www.azd.uscourts.gov.




*About The Barrett-Jackson Auction Company: * Established in 1971 and headquartered in Scottsdale, Ariz., Barrett-Jackson specializes in providing products and services to classic and collector car owners, astute collectors and automotive enthusiasts around the world. The company produces the "World's Greatest Collector Car Events" in Scottsdale and Palm Beach, Fla. For more information, visit www.barrett-jackson.com.

[tirebird]

More B-J response, written prior to the lawsuit, and posted on a blog site where the original rumors were posted.

Barrett-Jackson responds

As always Barrett-Jackson wishes to thank our many customers, guests and fellow car enthusiasts. Working together we create something very special in Scottsdale every January and Palm Beach a couple of months later.

However, some recent, false postings on blogs and discussion forums now force us to shift from thanking so many to asking an irresponsible few: “what were you thinking?”

Also, please consider this posting an official, legal request of this blog from Barrett-Jackson to remove all content sparked by the post below since the original source of the information has since retracted the story and further publication of it, such as on this forum, will be subject to the aggressive legal action we should and must take to eliminate the absurd and false information contained on this site.

Though our attorney disagrees with me, I am of the mindset that Mr.
Barer’s original comments at www.apexstrategy.com (fourwheeldrift blog) – comments that led to others such as this blog to post the same inaccurate, irresponsible and legal defamatory information about Barrett-Jackson’s business practices -- may have been naïve or
innocent. That’s because he may have simply been careless to repeat
rumors he has heard from so-called “insiders” who claim to know various salacious things about our recent event. It is hard to imagine that a “freelance journalist” (as Mr. Barer’s website defines him) would recklessly publish so many unfounded and untrue statements in one package. Regardless of Mr. Barer’s intent, Barrett-Jackson takes all public attacks on its business practices quite seriously, particularly when they are published to an audience as far-reaching as users of the Internet by someone holding himself out as a professional journalist.

As with Mr. Barer’s original posting – one he has now replaced (see
below) --repeating his original comments on this blog does not excuse the false and defamatory information now posted as a result of Mr. Barrer’s original, bogus entry.

As President of Barrett-Jackson, I can assure readers of this forum that the claims made in Mr. Barer’s posting are patently false. There is no lawsuit by a well-known judge. There is no class action lawsuit. There is no situation involving Barrett-Jackson owning many cars that are run through the auction and providing “shill bidders” to inflate prices of vehicles. There are no secret trucks transporting vehicles back to Barrett-Jackson’s “warehouse” after unsuccessful sales. It is impossible to respond to each of the claims made in this posting in any reasonable, professional manner, and Mr. Barer should not be so reckless in repeating as “proven” such fabricated stories. This forum should not be so reckless as to repeat them.

In fact, the laundry list of wrongdoing cited as fact by Mr. Barer would be almost comical if the statements were not so directly harmful to the business that hundreds of people have worked so hard to build in these last
36 years.

The varied and far-fetched claims made by Mr. Barer in his story are not worthy of any further response other than to say that the only lawsuit surrounding these matters is likely to be one for defamation filed by Barrett-Jackson against any and all who repeat fantasy rather than fact.

Finally, thank you to all of our bidders, buyers and enthusiasts who wrote in and directly refuted this nonsense. It had an impact on Mr.
Barer and if we have one thing to thank him for is that he was willing to listen after receiving an avalanche of testimonials and facts directly refuting his rumor and innuendo.

Good people when confronted with good, new information re-evaluate and correct course. That is what Mr. Barer has done and what this forum should do as well.


Steve Davis

President

[GRB]

If it goes to court and regardless of who wins Blondy, Shades and BJ's reputation can still take a hit if the defendant brings certain indisputable truths to light. And IMHO I can't imagine B/J WITHOUT at least some dirty laundry.

[x Baldwin Motion]

"the above incident has made its way onto more than 20 automotive-related online "blogs" and discussion boards frequented by thousands of classic car enthusiasts around the world."

always important to state the facts I know to be true, otherwise, it's just my humble opinion and should be indidcated as such to protect ourselves and our host sites from crazy lawsuits. JMHO

now, about that one of one...........

[tirebird]

Here's a link to the actual court filing naming the defendant.

http://www.sportscarmarket.com/bjcomplaint.pdf

[kwhizz]

Sounds like the Seller went off the Deep End when the car didn't sell for what he wanted.......This is not good for all that are involved.......

Ken

[John]

..which car was it?

[nuch_ss396]

[ QUOTE ]
Sounds like the Seller went off the Deep End when the car didn't sell for what he wanted.......This is not good for all that are involved.......

Ken

[/ QUOTE ]

This gets back to the heart of the matter that was discussed
to death here a couple of months ago. No Reserve Auctions

[tirebird]

The complaint has the name of the defendant and a description of the car.

There is a larger issue here and it has to do with the so-called "new media". A lot of bloggers like to claim they are "citizen journalists". To some extent, that's like saying you're a "citizen surgeon". I'm not saying there are not a lot of good bloggers out there who are careful before they start hitting the keys. But, there are a lot of bloggers who are simply rumor mongers. Rightly or wrongly, on this site and on any other, what you write doesn't go away. If a journalist is repeating rumors and innuendos about individuals or companies without checking the truthfulness of what he/she is writing, then they are exposed for a big lawsuit. The first thing the "citizen journalist" bloggers should have done, in this and many other cases, is to check the facts. Did he ask to speak to the people who claim to have inside information? Did he ask to see the alleged rooms where BJ was storing cars, the secret trucks, the crooked judges and the shill bidders? There's always the best question a journalist knows to ask someone they're interviewing, "how would I know for sure what you're telling me is the truth?".

Some journalists are fond of saying, "there's always two sides to a story". In fact, there may be many sides to a story. What you find out when writing a story is that each answer usually brings more questions. What you also know is that you can't be in a hurry to publish or post your story. Haste not only makes waste, it also makes lawsuits.

That's why this lawsuit is a good thing, not only for the auction industry, but also for all the new journalists out there. If the allegations of impropriety are true in the auction industry, then it will come out in court. The defendant(the Michigan bank), will have it's time in court to present it's evidence including witnesses to the alleged B-J inproprieties. The suppoena, the deposition, the documents, and the testimony will prove or disprove, in this case at least, what's the truth and what's fantasy.

It also is a lesson to all of us to be careful about what we say or write about someone, his car and his business. Unless we know for sure the facts, then there's always some lawyer lurking who's more than willing to make you pay to defend what you said or wrote. Even if you're right, it may cost you a bundle to prove it. One of the laws of slander and libel is that the "truth is the best defense". We have to make sure we're telling the truth.

[Xplantdad]

[ QUOTE ]
..which car was it?

[/ QUOTE ]


This one!!