Home > Personal Finance > The Yelp Mistake That Will Drive Your Customers Away

Comments 2 Comments

Last week, I took the the Internet to find a new dentist. After searching for practitioners in my insurance network and finding a few within walking distance of my apartment, I plugged their office names into Yelp and started browsing the reviews. As many people probably do, I first gravitated toward the office with a 5-star rating.

Of course, the reviews were great. I felt confident that I’d go to this place and have a good experience, but I also value convenience, and this office was farther from my home than some others in my network.

Bad online reviews aren’t a dealbreaker for me. I don’t expect businesses to be perfect, and some consumers’ expectations are way too high. The dentist’s office closest to me had a 3.5-star rating, and as I read some of the reviews, I got the impression that it was an OK place. Some people had fantastic experiences, while others ranted about unpleasant office staff. I noticed the owner had responded to some of the negative comments, which I thought was good: I think it’s important for companies to follow up with dissatisfied customers.

Worse Than Unmet Expectations

I was considering calling that dentist to ask about appointment availability, until I clicked “read more” on the owner’s responses to negative reviews. He picked apart the customers’ reviews with lengthy, passive-aggressive posts that can be summarized as “We’re sorry you had this experience, but it’s not our fault.” Even if the customers had not been justified in all their criticisms, the owner’s responses came across as defensive and unprofessional. It made me think that if I had an issue with my visit to the dentist, the owner would work harder to avoid blame than to help resolve the problem.

In short, it wasn’t a couple of negative reviews that made me take my business elsewhere, but rather how the company handled them. Trying to discredit or shut down negative feedback doesn’t make businesses look good, though many are trying it anyway. As online reviews have become increasingly common, so have reports of companies adding non-disparagement clauses into consumer contracts and businesses threatening to sue consumers for posting poor reviews online.

For example, a fertility company recently threatened to sue a woman over her compliant to the Better Business Bureau for violating a non-disparagement clause in her agreement. There seem to be a lot of legal problems with the company’s threat, as explained in this Consumerist article, but it’s scary to think a company can come after you for sharing an honest experience so others don’t make the same mistake. Non-disparagement clauses in consumer contracts have been outlawed in California, and there have been attempts at federal legislation in the same vein, but it remains a bit of an uncertain territory.

Alex Stern, a consumer law attorney in Florida, said consumers worried about non-disparagement clauses should look at the fine print of agreements. If there’s a non-disparagement clause (sometimes in a confidentiality section) it’s more likely to be enforceable if it’s specific, like if there’s a damages clause saying disparagement is punishable by a certain amount of money, Stern said.

“In most instances a non-disparagement clause is difficult to enforce, because it’s hard to know what someone’s one negative review on Yelp cost this business,” Stern said. Still, threatening letters and lawsuits have popped up. “If a consumer is really afraid of a non-disparagement clause, obviously I would encourage you to do business with someone else.”

What’s ironic is how companies are willing to sue over negative reviews, when the very action of going after a customer is bad PR. Spreading harmful lies is one thing — and that’s what libel and slander laws are for — but trying to scare people away from posting honest feedback about your company doesn’t make you look good. I think a lot of consumers understand that businesses can’t make everyone happy, but it’s often how you deal with unhappy customers that matters most to your company’s reputation.

This story is an Op/Ed contribution to Credit.com and does not necessarily represent the views of the company or its partners.

More Money-Saving Reads:

Image: iStock

Comments on articles and responses to those comments are not provided or commissioned by a bank advertiser. Responses have not been reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by a bank advertiser. It is not a bank advertiser's responsibility to ensure all posts and/or questions are answered.

Please note that our comments are moderated, so it may take a little time before you see them on the page. Thanks for your patience.

  • http://www.moneybeagle.com/ Money Beagle

    Good point. A close second is when they will copy and paste the same ‘reply’ to every negative post that they receive. Don’t even bother if you won’t address the concerns individually. The best response is one that acknowledges the problems brought forward. They may not reimburse the person, they may not even correct anything, but just to acknowledge that the issue had a negative impact on someones experience is the biggest thing that they can offer, and can go a long way.

  • martinw392

    Yelp needs to be boycotted, The BEST policy is to completely ignore yelp, NEVER respond to anything. They filter reviews and extort small businesses with with the threat of showing only negative reviews unless a business advertises.

Certain credit cards and other financial products mentioned in this and other articles on Credit.com News & Advice may also be offered through Credit.com product pages, and Credit.com will be compensated if our users apply for and ultimately sign up for any of these cards or products. However, this relationship does not result in any preferential editorial treatment.

Hello, Reader!

Thanks for checking out Credit.com. We hope you find the site and the journalism we produce useful. We wanted to take some time to tell you a bit about ourselves.

Our People

The Credit.com editorial team is staffed by a team of editors and reporters, each with many years of financial reporting experience. We’ve worked for places like the New York Times, American Banker, Frontline, TheStreet.com, Business Insider, ABC News, NBC News, CNBC and many others. We also employ a few freelancers and more than 50 contributors (these are typically subject matter experts from the worlds of finance, academia, politics, business and elsewhere).

Our Reporting

We take great pains to ensure that the articles, video and graphics you see on Credit.com are thoroughly reported and fact-checked. Each story is read by two separate editors, and we adhere to the highest editorial standards. We’re not perfect, however, and if you see something that you think is wrong, please email us at editorial team [at] credit [dot] com,

The Credit.com editorial team is committed to providing our readers and viewers with sound, well-reported and understandable information designed to inform and empower. We won’t tell you what to do. We will, however, do our best to explain the consequences of various actions, thereby arming you with the information you need to make decisions that are in your best interests. We also write about things relating to money and finance we think are interesting and want to share.

In addition to appearing on Credit.com, our articles are syndicated to dozens of other news sites. We have more than 100 partners, including MSN, ABC News, CBS News, Yahoo, Marketwatch, Scripps, Money Magazine and many others. This network operates similarly to the Associated Press or Reuters, except we focus almost exclusively on issues relating to personal finance. These are not advertorial or paid placements, rather we provide these articles to our partners in most cases for free. These relationships create more awareness of Credit.com in general and they result in more traffic to us as well.

Our Business Model

Credit.com’s journalism is largely supported by an e-commerce business model. Rather than rely on revenue from display ad impressions, Credit.com maintains a financial marketplace separate from its editorial pages. When someone navigates to those pages, and applies for a credit card, for example, Credit.com will get paid what is essentially a finder’s fee if that person ends up getting the card. That doesn’t mean, however, that our editorial decisions are informed by the products available in our marketplace. The editorial team chooses what to write about and how to write about it independently of the decisions and priorities of the business side of the company. In fact, we maintain a strict and important firewall between the editorial and business departments. Our mission as journalists is to serve the reader, not the advertiser. In that sense, we are no different from any other news organization that is supported by ad revenue.

Visitors to Credit.com are also able to register for a free Credit.com account, which gives them access to a tool called The Credit Report Card. This tool provides users with two free credit scores and a breakdown of the information in their Experian credit report, updated twice monthly. Again, this tool is entirely free, and we mention that frequently in our articles, because we think that it’s a good thing for users to have access to data like this. Separate from its educational value, there is also a business angle to the Credit Report Card. Registered users can be matched with products and services for which they are most likely to qualify. In other words, if you register and you find that your credit is less than stellar, Credit.com won’t recommend a high-end platinum credit card that requires an excellent credit score You’d likely get rejected, and that’s no good for you or Credit.com. You’d be no closer to getting a product you need, there’d be a wasted inquiry on your credit report, and Credit.com wouldn’t get paid. These are essentially what are commonly referred to as "targeted ads" in the world of the Internet. Despite all of this, however, even if you never apply for any product, the Credit Report Card will remain free, and none of this will impact how the editorial team reports on credit and credit scores.

Our Owners

Credit.com is owned by Progrexion Holdings Inc. which is the owner and administrator of a number of business related to credit and credit repair, including CreditRepair.com, and eFolks. In addition, Progrexion also provides services to Lexington Law Firm as a third party provider. Despite being owned by Progrexion, it is not the role of the Credit.com editorial team to advocate the use of the company’s other services. In articles, reporters may mention credit repair as an option, for example, but we’ll also be sure to note the various alternatives to that service. Furthermore, you may see ads for credit repair services on Credit.com, but the editorial team isn’t responsible for the creation or implementation of those ads, anymore than reporters for the New York Times or Washington Post are responsible for the ads on their sites.

Your Stories

Lastly, much of what we do is informed by our own experiences as well as the experiences of our readers. We want to tell your stories if you’re interested in sharing them. Please email us at story ideas [at] credit [dot] com with ideas or visit us on Facebook or Twitter.

Thanks for stopping by.

- The Credit.com Editorial Team