Pro Solar Hawaii the FTC and the CRFA of 2016

 It has been suggested that now that I have received the letter from the Hawaii Regulated Complaints office, I should file a complaint with the FTC about Ryan Thompson dba Pro Solar Hawaii has filed a lawsuit for my online reviews of the horrible service I received from him. I might point out Ryan Thompson, dba Pro Solar Hawaii did not defend himself in any kind of a hearing to the RICO charges; he/just paid the fine. Yet, spends thousands of dollars to sue me for leaving reviews of him. Odd, no?

But, let us not stray off course. In 2016  due to the enormous number of lawsuits in the court systems, congress was forced to pass The Consumer Review Fairness Act (CRFA) This act is to protect people’s ability to share their honest opinions about a business’s products, services, or conduct, in any forum, including social media.

The law, as written, protects most honest consumer assessments, including online reviews, social media posts, upload photos/videos, etc. But, of wonder, it's not just product reviews it covers. It also applies to consumer evaluations of a company’s customer service. Is this not ultimately what this blog is?

Now, that last paragraph is important. Ryan Thompson, dba Pro Solar Hawaii has often said that my posting reviews of the well-proven horrible service I received from him violates our contract. A contract that it appears even RICO says is not a valid contract. See, Ryan Thompson, dba Pro Solar Hawaii says that an arbitration clause prevented me from posting my reviews and issues. I swear that's not an exaggeration.  

On July 5th, 2018, Ryan Thompson dba Pro Solar Hawaii through his attorney, filed in the Circuit Court of the third district in the state and county of Hawaii an amended complaint about "breach of contract." In "Count 1 - Breach Of Contract," paragraph 12 says my posting reviews is a violation of the contract. (see below)

This, as I have been informed, turns out to violate the CRFA. I've visited the FTC website, and I gotta tell ya, it looks clear to me to be a violation! I am no lawyer and have no idea if I understand it correctly. One has to ask:  Now, why would a lawyer admit in a court filing that his client has breached the CRFA? The FTC website is obvious.

"To make sure your company is complying with the Consumer Review Fairness Act:

• Review your form contracts, including online terms and conditions; and
• Remove any provision that restricts people from sharing their honest reviews, penalizes those who do, or claims copyright over peoples’ reviews (even if you’ve never tried to enforce it or have no intention of enforcing it)."

I have not, as of posting, spoken to my attorney about this. I am going to. If this is a violation of the CRFA, it is my duty as an American to inform the FTC of this intimidation. I've really got nothing to lose. I have the evidence of the violation in a paper filed in the court by Ryan Thompson, dba Pro Solar Hawaii legal representative.

At this point, I have no reason not to file with the FTC about this. I could be wrong. In which case, nothing happens. But if I am correct, "The law specifies that a violation of the CRFA will be treated the same as violating an FTC rule defining an unfair or deceptive act or practice. This means that your company could be subject to financial penalties, as well as a federal court order." If I were Ryan Thompson, dba Pro Solar Hawaii my action would concern me in the penalties would scare the hell outta me.

Read More