Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

Pablos - check out this thread

Discussion in 'Businesses and Service Providers' started by revken, Dec 4, 2007.

  1. A friend of mine in Melbourne has had a lot of trouble with Pablos. Prospective customers might like to check out this thread on the SV site http://www.svdownunder.com/index.php?topic=14708.0

  2. Thanks Revken, appreciate the heads-up and feedback.

    Have heard good things and bad things about Pablos in the past, but this is the first I've heard of them recently. Lets hope your friends experience doesn't become a recurring story for Pablos.

    Anyone else with recent feedback/experience, good or bad, of Pablos?
  3. Thank you to mods (smee perhaps?) for cleaning up a rather ratty thread. My head is pulled in.
  4. Why not make it first-hand experience?

    Any fool can claim "someone he knows" had this, that or the other happen to him...and many do.


    Trevor G
  5. Its called "word of mouth".

    Let's not bring the rider down philosophy to good/bad experiences for gawd sakes!... this place will end up saccharin beyond tolerance!
  6. the link in the 1st post IS to "first-hand" experience, afterall its thats guys bike we are talking about.....and even then i dont see any problems with people passing on info friends have told them about....
  7. Better saccharin than arsenic, perhaps?


    Trevor G

    PS Maybe, since it's written and published, it's potentially called libel.

    It certainly isn't "word of mouth". Gossip, maybe? Unsubstantiated hearsay? It certainly should be first person, which a link to another site is not...
  8. Trevor,

    :-s :?


    The link in the OP is to a FIRST HAND account of a repair that hasn't gone well. So just how is your post relevant?


    The thread history was that Smee poked an unneccessary stick into the OP, the OP reacted, and there was a bit of vitriol until the thread was cleaned up. That's where the "thanks" and "head pulled in" comment came in... then you came in with a totally botched up the interpretation and owned yourself.

    Take a deep breathe mate. Chill.

    Yeh, like this place is really another version of netrider??? :? :roll:

    By the way, for libel to be in play, the libelled party have to prove injury. Like that's ever going to happen.

    Have another cuppa mate. It's all ok. The sky is staying just where it's always been.

  9. I wonder if we have some one that works there …someone seems be taking the criticism a little to personally :roll:

  10. strange, i used to use pablos all the time (fixed the cbr after it was rear ended) and they were quick and efficient.

    but good and bad everywhere i suppose
  11. Popcorn..?! :oops:

    You guys! You just love a good stoush! lol. :blackeye: :cheeky:

    OK, so perhaps my response was a a touch acerbic, but the sentiment was right.

    Anyhoo... so how about that Pablos... :-w
  12. Geez, this thread is becoming a penis size competition again isnt it?

    Yeah, I posted the thread because I thought it was serious enough to warrant it and I guess to encourage discussion. If you check back now you will read that Pablos have agreed to correct the problems, so hopefully very soon I will be able to report it has been rectified. It is a heads up I think as all bike shops and repairers are better at some things but not others. It was a link to a first hand account (it seems there is abit of handiwork going on in this thread), not so much a "I know a friend who has an uncle . . . . . "
    Now, for libel, the thread linked is factual. The repairs were not good, I think you'd have to admit that. If I write that someone has done a bad job when they had done well, then fine, but if I write about a bad job that is a bad job, that is the truth, so no libel. Does anyone jump to Peter Stevens defence this quick when they get criticized? Or Action? mmmm
    Trevor, pull your own head in too mate. Or at least pull it out, out of the butt it is parked in. Stay tuned though, because hopefully there will be a happy ending and we will see a bike shop admitting the problems and dealing with it in a manner that is satisfactory. That would be a good outcome for the thread, because any bike shop can do shoddy work, what is just as important is how a grieveance is dealt with, and so far, as ATG has reported, the owner seems serious about fixing the issues.
  13. We could post links to all sorts of things, good and bad.

    A reputation should not be under threat until the person who owns it has halted all negotiation. Even then you need to be sure that what the second-hand claimant has claimed is actually true.

    It's not first hand unless he himself comes in here and posts, and answers questions about his post. Cowardice, possibly, to have other people push your barrow....especially when you are slamming another party altogether.

    You might be required to argue that unsubstantiated defense in court one day - you'll possibly find that the legal profession has a somewhat different interpretation of the law...


    Trevor G
  14. Hmmm... maybe read again what I wrote. First hand means the guy who had the problem, not someone claiming friendship with someone who had a problem... :)

    Funny. I cannot find where I have referred to the deleted post or posts. I had no idea they existed until you mentioned it. I was just commenting on a potentially malicious posting of an external link to a story about someone else... (I hope you don't mind me cleaning up your grammar a little in the quote above.)

    Can you explain the unusual expression: "owned yourself"?

    You seem to be delighting in attacking some of my posts recently...I don't mind the attention but surely you have better things to do? ;-)

    Or maybe you could do it a little better? With some more fact or substantiation and less imagination? :)


    Trevor G

    PS I'm OK actually, quite OK. ;-) Don't you worry your purty little head about me now...and it's "breath", not "breathe", OK?

  15. Wonder again if you were referring to me ;-)


    Trevor G

    PS Unless you meant that robsalvv and revken were taking things a little too personally; then I might agree!
  16. nah, course not. its all fun. last week, that was personal lol
  17. :rofl:

    Rightio Einstein Trev... resorting to correcting grammar and spelling misdemeanors is a sign of a desperate punch drunk person trying to land blows where there are none to land. :roll:

    You're doing a brilliant job of owning yourself my friend. Can't wait for the next installment! :LOL:

    You've clearly misunderstood the OP and apparently, clearly misunderstood the incredibly obvious point that the link in the OP is to a FIRST HAND ACCOUNT of an individual's direct experience with a botched repair. Hello Mcfly??

    If you wish to interact with the guy sharing his story, sign up to that forum and do so... the story is no less a first hand account simply because it's been linked to here. :roll:

    Seriously Trevor, you pass your self off as an intelligent human being, and until this particular thread I thought so too. If you'd only taken that breath, you might have cleared up that fixated cloudy point you're holding onto.

    Your confused understanding is uttery underlined by your last couple of posts.

    Allow me to dissect one particular paragraph - and clear up some confusion right now:
    Er, you didn't refer to them. I didn't say nor did I infer that you did. You picked up on Rev's "pulled my head in" comment and got it utterly out of context. I was trying to help you by pointing out the thread history... clearly you missed that.

    Like, derr, hello Captain obvious! That's why I pointed out the thread history so you could get the right context... LMAO.

    Sigh. There's been no libel in this thread. The link is to a first hand account of an individual's direct experience... so I have no idea what tree you're barking up, but there's no cat up there mate... sigh, you know what, it doesn't matter... oh I get it... you must be having me on... it's a joke! Because there's no way you could be this obtuse?!

    Good one Trev! :LOL:


    ps. if you're not joking, then thanks for all the tips, but I don't need them since you've done a fine job of owning yourself. ...:LOL:
  18. I've just come across this thread, & seriously dood, its been awhile since
    I read so much shit.

    Tell me you are trolling because no one can be so dumb [​IMG]


    These 3 Amigo mofo's a few years ago decided to take $3000 off me & not
    give me the 6 bikes I wanted (to both re-sell & give some away as Xmas
    pressies). For months they were giving excuses why my bikes hadn't turned

    I contacted other buyers of theres & soon realised they'd ripped others
    off as well & not one of em had done anything about it.

    Well they'd just f*cked with the wrong person.

    First thing I did was contact Ebay Australia in Syd & got their on-line
    business shut down.. any boy did that get under their skin.

    Consumer Affairs then launched their investigation, & 3 months later
    made a finding (which was given to me in writing) that they'd both
    committed theft & contravened laws outside of the Trade Practices Act.

    They then became aware of posts I'd made about em warning others not
    to go near em & telling everyone the story in full to date. They registered
    on the same bike site & tried talking shit to negate what I was saying.

    I made a phone call & obtained the 3 directors name, DOB & home
    addresses and sent letters of demand to all three of em. They had
    X days to deposit into my account, the money they stole off me, 6mths
    worth of lost interest & re-imbursement of all bank fees I incurred due
    to being in the red.

    They then mistakenly replied with a letter threatening to tear me a new
    a*rsehole if I proceeded with further action & that they would sue me for
    loss of earnings suffered to date, & for future losses until such time Ebay
    re-activated their account.. not to mention defamation for all the shit I
    said to them, & about them on the forum.

    Their letter was just added to the mountain of evidence I had on em.

    When the money I request to cease action was not deposited, documents
    were posted to them in S.A advising of the court date & that attendance by
    them was required in Melbourne.

    I then got an urgent fax from their lawyer 48hrs before the hearing
    advising that if I agreed to stop legal action, the money would be in my
    account within 5 days. She ended the letter with such words as "my client
    denies any wrongdoing and they reserve the right to sue you for defamation"

    I contacted the courts & organised to put a hold on proceedings just in case
    they didn't come thru. I sent a letter back to the lawyer saying action has
    been stopped, & in response to threats to sue, I told her I'd see her in
    court anyday & that they will never get another cent from me again.

    I haven't checked their site for ages, but they started up their own forum.
    I went on there & asked em when they're planning to tear me that new
    a*sehole they were telling me about, & when they were going to sue me.

    4yrs later, I'm still waiting for the f*ckers to keep to their word like I kept
    to mine.

    Bottom line Trev, is that if some business does the dirty on you, & you
    have conclusive proof, they can't do shit if you tell everyone else about

    So don't come in here & talk ya bullshit. Go & click on the link in OP.. its
    FIRST-HAND f*cken experience spoken by the fella himself who's been
    f*cked over. Photos are even posted of the work done for crying out loud..
    and you trying to tell me that because the posts arent on this thread its not
    1st hand?

    You got rocks for brains or what? Seriously..

    & just to enlighten you further.. there is not even a scent of any libel being
    committed in this thread, so lets not go there OK.

    Libel: a false and malicious publication printed for the purpose of defaming
    a living person
  19. That's a good story, told in the first person. You're not quoting some anonymous poster on a different web site.

    Did you get your money or did they bluff you?


    Trevor G

    PS There are other aspects to libel which punish the "innocent" even when they are telling the truth. If you read up on the subject it could be fruitful...

    "In Australia defamation action is essentially concerned with damage to reputation, rather than publication being untrue or an invasion of a plaintiff's privacy. There has been disagreement about the appropriate balance between free speech and protection of reputations."

    "The overall shape of Australian defamation law is that a person who 'publishes' an assertion of fact or a comment that

    - injures - or, importantly, is 'likely' to injure - the personal, professional, trade or business reputation of an individual or a company

    - exposes them to ridicule or

    - causes people to avoid them

    is guilty of a tort, ie a civil offence."


    Australia has one of the highest libel/defamation rates in the world - per capita Sydney has twice the rate of the UK and ten times the rate in the USA.

    The problem is not: are you telling the truth? but: have you harmed the plaintiff?

    I know a lady who had to sell up (she lost her home) after losing a case brought against her. She and a friend were warning others about the unsavoury activities of a certain gentleman, who sued and won because his reputation had been harmed. They were not required or asked to prove their allegations. This is not unusual.

    (There is no harm in telling a third party story like this, since no one can be identified.)