The Better Ethics Bureau
Challenging the unethical behavior of the Better Business Bureau (BBB)
1/20/11
It is with a sense of "mission accomplished" that I take my leave of the Better Ethics Bureau. I have other fish to fry and must move on.
The Better Business Bureau, as we now know it, is on the ropes.
As we have shown over the past 16 months, the BBB is not the place for consumers to start with trust and is not worthy of one penny of membership dues.
Thanks to actions taken by the Connecticut State Attorney General, the BBB no longer gives dues-paying businesses higher grades than non-paying businesses.
Virtually overnight, millions of US businesses received a higher grade, not because they were any more trustworthy than they were the day before, but because of an arbitrary stroke of a pen at BBB headquarters, a pen held by one man only--the now much humbled CBBB president, Steve Cox.
For about a year now, most BBB articles in the press, no matter how favorable they are to the BBB, are followed by far more negative reader comments than positive ones. The public is getting it. The BBB is not to be trusted.
I am sure good businesses join the BBB with good intent, but how can you tell the good ones from the bad ones that also join? For example, at least 22 banks held passing grades from the BBB when they were closed by the FDIC in 2010. Many failed banks were BBB members and rated A+. When failing businesses can get the highest grades from the BBB, why would any businessperson risk a good reputation by joining it?
You should wonder what weaknesses BBB members are trying to hide under their BBB logo and how complicit the BBB is in helping them do just that.
Thus revealed is the conflict of interest at the core of BBB operations, a conflict it cannot resolve without complete transparency: The BBB's existence depends on the money it collects from the same businesses it reports on. The BBB claims to never favor dues-paying members. If you believe that, in the face of all the evidence to the contrary, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you. Cheap, too.
Further, the BBB pretends to be far more preemptive in warning consumers than it actually is. The BBB simply does not have the expertise, manpower, or infrastructure to meet its promises of consumer protection in any meaningful way. What it does spend big on are its clones-of-Steve-Cox executives and on those responsible for marketing and selling BBB memberships.
The website, www.Better Ethics Bureau.org, and the multitude of others like it, would not have seen the light of day if the BBB was receptive and reactive to complaints about its doings in the same way the BBB expects all other businesses to respond to it.
Ultimately, it took a State Attorney General with a threat to cease and desist that caused the BBB to change. That kind of says it all, doesn't it?
I look forward to continuing the many rich relationships developed over the past two years in the struggle against undeserved BBB influence in the marketplace. It was, and is still, so nice to know that I wasn't the only one to recognize that the BBB cannot be trusted and needed to be stopped.
Best Regards,
Scott Jordan
Business Owner
Private Citizen
12/29/10
Los Angeles Times: Head of LA-area BBB Resigns Amid Scandal
11/20/10
CBBB's Cox Bows to Pressure, Promises BBB Reforms
Give all credit to the Editor (pen name: Jimmie Rivers) and his associates at www.BBBRoundUp.com. Many were looking for the smoking gun that would bring the Better Business Bureau to heel. Smoking guns were everywhere, but slick PR work and a once great BBB reputation kept them from working like they should. So what did Jimmie and his bunch do? They custom made three smoking guns of their own.
After reports came out that BBBRoundUp was able to sign up Hamas (the terrorist organization) and a non-existent sushi restaurant with the BBB and get an A- rating for both, BBBRoundUp struck again with Stormfront, stinging the BBB into giving the white-supremacist website an A+.
This was enough to attract the attention of ABC's investigative reporter, Brian Ross (Joseph Rhee, Producer), who went on to broadcast devastating and convincing segments on the BBB's questionable operations during Good Morning America, ABC Evening News with Diane Sawyer, and 20/20. ABC News, Brian Ross: 20/20, Evening News, GMA and Print Reports
In this mix, Connecticut's Attorney General (and US Senator-elect) Richard Blumenthal ordered the BBBs in his state to stop rating businesses until the BBB de-couples grades from membership fees (Blumenthal Letter). Blumenthal would also like to see how much a business paid to become a member of the BBB on reliability reports. He also wants the BBB to disclose factual limitations of its rating system and show when a business's report data was last updated and reviewed (all recommendations the BEB has previously stated on this website).
Bowing to pressure from the resulting national media attention and the CT AG (and not before), CBBB President and CEO, Steve Cox, announced in a November 18 Internet posting that the CBBB will direct all BBBs to stop giving additional points to accredited businesses, streamline the process for receiving complaints on BBB sales practices, conduct a review of its process for accrediting businesses, and engage an independent third party to assist in this review. The CBBB will also launch an investigation into the LA-area BBB.
The BEB notes that Mr. Cox committed to the only somewhat mandatory aspect in Mr. Blumenthal's letter. Unfortunately, Mr. Cox is not committing at this time to full public disclosure of factual limitations, and of fees paid, on reliability reports.
COMPLAINT FILED WITH FTC
Because of the Cox baby steps, the BEB sent an investigation wish list to the FTC on November 20. FTC complaint #28336522 reads:
I have summarized much of my experience with the BBB and what I tried to do about it at www.betterethicsbureau.org. In light of recent investigative reporting by ABC's 20/20, the CT Attorney General's request that the BBB cease rating businesses in his state and the shady BBB operations revealed at www.bbbroundup.com, I wish to add my voice to the thousands of others who are fighting back against the undeserved influence of Better Business Bureaus everywhere.
For years, BBBs have engaged in extortion-like tactics to intimidate businesses into signing up with it. Please assure me and the public in general that:
1) The BBB does have the expertise and resources at the local level to carry out its many missions in such a way that the public can rely on its millions of reliability reports, and that the BBB has done so from the beginning;
2) The BBB has proven to you beyond a doubt that it does not treat member businesses any differently than non-member businesses when it comes to ratings and complaint handling;
3) The BBB is completely forthright and honest about its capabilities and shortcomings with the general public, and,
4) The BBB secret procedures and methods are completely consistent with its self-proclaimed trustworthiness.
Like many others, I am very concerned that the BBB operates in such a questionable manner right under the FTC's nose, because the BBB earned a position of trust in your eyes that it no longer deserves.
On behalf of millions and millions of good business people throughout our nation, thank you in advance for looking deeper into the questionable practices at the BBB.
File a complaint with the FTC (very simple process)
The BEB will also file an update to its 2009 complaint with the Arizona Attorney General's office according to these new developments.
Okay, NOW The CBBB Wants My Input
BEB input for Steve Cox, President/CEO, CBBB, per his request--AFTER he was busted by ABC, the CT AG, and BBBRoundUp--as posted at BBB Information Center, comment #159:
If one thing is clear about your 18 November 2010 statement it is this: Mr. Cox, you are not fit to lead the CBBB. This grading system is your baby and as many, including me, predicted it would, it has failed miserably. You need to step down so the real housecleaning at the BBB can begin.
At the core of the BBB's problems are your vision and leadership and twisted sense of business ethics. You led what was once a fine institution to the brink of disaster and you are not capable in your present state of mind to keep it from going over the cliff. Quite the contrary, as your statement reveals, you don't have a clue as to the complete and utter failure that awaits the BBB if you hold to your present course.
Because of the arrogance and close-mindedness you have shown in the past as well as in your statement of 18 November, I will not waste another minute of my time pretending that you will treat recommendations any differently than when they were first offered you over the past 23 months, in my case.
You, sir, must go, or at least show a much more serious change of direction, if the BBB stands any chance of survival at all.
OTHER DEVELOPING STORIES
BBB National Partner, Verizon Wireless Slapped with Record $25 Million Fine--Still Rated A-
In October 2010, Verizon Wireless, a BBB National Partner, was slapped with a record $25 million fine by the FCC for inappropriately charging over 15 million customers for data usage. Verizon must also refund $52.8 million. In June 2009, after an investigation by the Florida AG, Verizon Wireless agreed to pay $1.5 million in fines and refund millions of dollars to Floridians for third-party charges they were led to believe would be free. Just outside the 3-year BBB reporting window (and so no longer on the Verizon Wireless reliability report) Verizon Wireless settled with the NY AG in October 2007 for $1 million. This time Verizon advertised unlimited broadband service, but really had 5GB limit. Over the course of 4 years, Verizon terminated 13,000 customers for broadband overuse. For all this, Verizon Wireless is still accredited by the BBB with an A- rating. The BBB even praises the Verizon Wireless for cooperating with authorities when the rest of us ask, if Verizon is a truly an ethical company, why did the authorities have to get involved in the first place? By comparison, non-dues-paying Sprint is rated B-* with no government actions. Non-dues-paying T Mobile has a C rating* with the same Florida AG action listed. (Complaints don't count until we have independent verification that the BBB treats complaints the same way on reports for both paying and non-dues-paying businesses.)
By the way, FTC, could you find out for us how much Verizon is paying the BBB for such favorable treatment?
*Ratings as of 11/20/2010
FCC Summary of $25 Million Settlement with Verizon
Florida AG $1.5 Million Settlement with Verizon
FCC Target Verizon Wireless is BBB National Partner
NY AG Slammed Verizon Wireless with $1 Million Fine, Oct 2007
BBB Reliability Report: T Mobile (Please let me know if this rating changes from C.)
BBB Reliability Report: Sprint (Please let me know if this rating changes from B-.)
BBB Reliability Report: Verizon Wireless (Please let me know if this rating changes from A-.)
Two more businesses sue the BBB (Recent lawsuits v. BBB known to BEB now total 6)
Gombossey: TicketNetwork, LLC Sues CT Better Business Bureau for Deceptive Practices
A Texas company notified the BEB last week it has also filed a lawsuit against the BBB. . . developing . . .
At least two more A+ rated banks fail
The FDIC closed First Arizona Savings, an FSB, on October 22. Since no buyer could be found for the bank's assets, according to a local Fox 10 TV news report, account holders were locked out from their money until the FDIC could verify account balances and then cut and mail the checks for guaranteed deposits. So, yet another questionable BBB practice continues. A flaw in the rating system allows the BBB to give troubled businesses accreditation and its highest rating.
BEB WARNING: As time goes on, more troubled banks and other failing businesses will pay for BBB accreditation and high grades to gain undeserved credibility in the marketplace.
BEB Milestones: The BEB has surpassed 50,000 hits (with over 4,600 unique visitors), accumulating another 25,000 hits in just 4 months.
Please send comments, corrections, updates, BBB horror stories, links to articles and original articles critical of the BBB to Messages@BetterEthicsBureau.org. Also, if you need someone to speak with about a problem with the BBB, you might email us to get things going. We will respect and protect your privacy.
8/30/10
TrustLink Comments Not Consistent with BBB Rating: As of 8/30/2010, consumers rate LowerMyBills.com one star out of five, the lowest rating possible, at TrustLink.com. However, LMB has paid the Better Business Bureau an undisclosed amount to receive the BBB's highest rating of A+. The BEB finds that the consumer reviews posted at TrustLink paint a dramatically different picture of LMB than does the BBB's candy-coated complaint summary for this business. (See LMB reliability report, then click on ">More" under Complaint Experience.)
Orange County Register, Jan Norman: Hamas gets A- from Better Business Bureau (See root story under 8/5/10.)
8/5/10
LA BBB Grants HAMAS Membership and an A- in bbbroundup.com Sting
BBB Report says [LA BBB president] Bill Mitchell is Hamas contact/owner. BBB does not check phony address.
West Hartford News: George Gombossy Weighs in on the BBB and Hamas
BBB reacts (again) to correct (somewhat) a funky rating--this time it's Starbucks
7/22/10
Some BBBs Admit Lack of Investigation into Actual Products and Services: Some BBBs have added disclaimers to reliability reports for BBB members, admitting the BBB does not investigate the actual quality of a business's products and/or services. Here's a statement copied from a Washington DC reliability report.
"BBB accreditation does not mean that the business' products or services have been evaluated or endorsed by BBB, or that BBB has made a determination as to the business' product quality or competency in performing services." Taken from http://www.dc.bbb.org/report.html?national=y&compid=13522 on July 22, 2010
As can be seen, however, the BBB still does not disclose how much a BBB member had to pay to receive a higher rating and the rating the business would receive if it was not a member. Such information would allow the consumer to more fully evaluate the conflict of interest that exists between the consumer, the BBB, and the paying BBB member.
Yet, the BEB recognizes that the BBB is headed in the right direction with this slightly improved disclaimer. However, the BEB recommends a more direct statement such as "The BBB does not investigate the actual quality of products and/or services for any business. This business paid a total of $550 in membership fees and would be rated A if it was a non-member."
The BEB encourages the BBB to more aggressively educate and inform the public of the conflicts of interest and the shortcomings of its rating system.
BEB Milestones: On July 18, www.BetterEthicsBureau.org surpassed milestones of 25,000 hits and 2,500 unique visitors just 10.5 months after its inception on September 1, 2009. Web traffic in recent months indicate that interest in how the BBB really operates is dramatically increasing.
5/29/10
Las Vegas BBB Gives Failing Sun West Bank "A" Rating: The BBB continues to mislead the public with its questionable rating system and public relations hype.
This time, the BBB for Southern Nevada gives a failing Sun West Bank in Las Vegas a higher grade (A) than a vibrant, extremely successful entity such as Incorp (C).
No wonder Incorp is suing the Las Vegas BBB for false advertising and business disparagement.
The FDIC shut down Sun West Bank on Friday, May 28, 2010. It is at least the 17th failing bank given a passing grade by the BBB since 12/31/09.
As doubts mount about the BBB's reliability, an increasingly aware public calls for an independent investigation and full disclosure of secret BBB practices.
Others, like Incorp, demand compensation for damages resulting from the BBB’s lack of transparency and accountability to the public.
In a thread spanning two years (2008-2010), California businesses nail BBB telemarketers. Posts from 36 individuals at 800notes.com show questionable BBB sales practices continue unchecked to this day. Here is the last entry posted March 18, 2010 by "Leslie".
"Received a call from some guy asking me directly in regards to a non-response to a complaint I received in 2008? Really 2 years ago! He gave me the client's name, looked it up on our system and told him we have no client by that name. Then he confirmed my business address, which was correct, but told me that the serviced client was located in Alameda, CA. I explained to him that we do not service Northern California as we are located in Southern California. We only service locally. Then he went into his sales pitch, I stopped him in his tracks asking that if I did get a complaint, wouldn't I have heard from the client and BBB would have followed up with a letter? So I asked him how could a business respond if they didn't know about it? Back to his sales pitch about joining the BBB. I politely told him that if this is how BBB conducts business and doesn't have correct information, that my business isn't interested. He got a little 'mad' and hung up. Wow, what a scam!"
www.800notes.com See all 36 entries for 818-401-1487 and learn about other shady BBB sales practices.
Better Business Bureau Verify 818-401-1487 is for the Better Business Bureau.
5/19/10
The FDIC Office of the Ombudsman responds: The FDIC does not endorse the BBB or its rating system. The FDIC did appreciate the recognition of its Chairman and her work. Editor's note: Maybe a little less now, after learning more about how the BBB really operates!
FDIC email dated 5/19/10
"Mr. Jordan,
Thank you for your recent email regarding Chairman Bair’s receipt of an award from the Better Business Bureau. Chairman Bair is frequently given awards and recognitions for her leadership in the FDIC’s role in the present economic crisis. The FDIC is going through challenging times and we appreciate that we have a solid leader to direct our efforts.
The receipt of this award is an endorsement of the FDIC Chairman by the BBB rather than an endorsement of the BBB by the FDIC. The FDIC uses its own internal rating and evaluation system for banks rather that [sic] the BBB’s or any other external rating system.
We also note that, although the Chairman was presented the award at the Annual International Torch Awards Ceremony, she was given what was called a Presidents Award.
We appreciate your comments and the interest expressed by many groups as the FDIC continues its demanding role of insuring depositor funds and resolving failed banks.
FDIC Office of the Ombudsman"
In a follow-up email, the BEB asked the FDIC to let the public know if the BBB is ever granted greater access to FDIC operations and information than the public.
5/18/10
Incorp Services Inc., one of the nation's largest registered agent providers, is suing the Las Vegas BBB for false advertising and business disparagement.
See the story by Steve Green, Las Vegas Sun. See Incorp lawsuit here (Courtesy of the Las Vegas Sun).
Among other things, the lawsuit offers some details on rapidly vacillating ratings, low ratings for no compelling reason, mishandled complaints, and easy manipulation of ratings via a weakness in BBB website design. Currently Incorp is rated C because of the number of complaints filed against this nationwide company with 65,000 clients--only 27 in the last 36 months! In comparison, the BBB rates a bank closed by the FDIC 26 days ago as an A+ (Peotone Bank). Chicago basement waterproofing contrator Perma-Seal Basement Systems has 76 complaints (32 in the last 12 months) and is rated A+ by the Chicago BBB. However, Perma-Seal is run by BBB member and Chairman of the Board for the Chicago BBB, Roy E. Spencer. The BEB asks the BBB to let the world see what it is doing behind closed doors so there is no question as to its trustworthiness.
Move over Yelp. The BBB is now fighting four lawsuits known to the BEB at this time. BEB prediction: There will be many more.
5/17/10
The BBB gives 3 more failing banks passing grades (at least 16 since 12/31/09), while giving FDIC Chair Sheila Bair its 2010 International Torch Award. The BBB has yet to alert the public to the major problems with its rating system. The BEB has contacted the Ombudsman of the FDIC for an explanation of the FDIC's relationship with the BBB . . . Developing
What is the value of an A+ rating from the BBB? Not much! Peotone Bank shuttered 4/23/10 by the FDIC and Perma-Seal Basement Systems, Inc. with 76 complaints are still rated A+ by the Chicago BBB. Further, after 25 days, the BBB Reliability Report for Peotone Bank does not yet reflect its closing by the FDIC in the Government Actions section . . . Developing
David Kyle breaks down the details of a dubious BBB sales call, with actual recordings, in a very impressive report. Link here.
Can BBB accredited members be trusted? The BEB questions the intentions of an BBB accredited member, rated A+, that sees big problems with BBB practices but joins it anyway. The BEB asks "How do you separate yourself 'from schmucks and low-lifes' by joining an organization you know to be unethical?" He also recommends that others do like he does and use the BBB logo on their websites, against BBB Use of Logo Policies, and without paying for the privilege. Here's the link to the website so you can judge for yourself. (This report will be removed if the BEB editor is shown to be wrong in his read of this web page, or as promised the owner, if this web page is taken down. If the owner of this website alters his views on his website, his new views may be reported here.)
PRESS RELEASES
5/4/10
OOPS, BBB Flubs Again: Two More Failing Banks Get Passing Grades
4/26/10
BBB Rating Woes Continue:
Chicago BBB Rates Two Failing Banks A+, a Third B-
Failed Bank Closed December 2009 Still Rated A+ by BBB
Must Read: McIntrye Law Firm PLLC Letter to CCCB:
A Winning Strategy for Lawsuits Against the BBB?
4/17/10: BBB Rates Four More Failing Banks "A" or Higher
3/8/10: Failing Bank Held "A" Rating by BBB When Closed by Feds
2/21/10: BBB Gives Troubled Banks Passing Grade
9/8/09: Six Strategies to Curb Unethical Behavior at the Better Business Bureau
9/3/09: How Reliable Are the BBB's New Ratings of Local Businesses?
9/3/09: What You Can Do to Limit Harm the BBB May Cause Your Business
Commentary
2/21/10: New Mexico BBB President Reveals Oblique Lawsuit Defense Tactic
12/15/09: BEB Founder Comments on NPR Report about BBB
12/3/09: Email to the Council of Better Business Bureaus
11/27/09: Garage Door Opens to Questionable BBB Ratings
Highly Recommended
California: bbbRoundUp.com Provides Breaking News and Commentary Unfavorable to the BBB
Georgia: Atlanta Contractor Takes Stand Against BBB, Documents Questionable BBB Behavior at MechanicsResponds.com and ***New*** (3/23/10) a new blog at BBB-Blog.com
11/17/09: A BBB We All Can Live With, A Blueprint for BBB Reform (Last Updated 12/16/2009)
Criticism of the BBB From Around the US
Editor's note: This section shows the width, breadth and depth of the growing dissappointment with the BBB. Please note that criticisms originate with professionals of many fields, unrelated journalists, and well-spoken consumers--from all over the United States. Many more links could be listed here. However, the editor has chosen the most credible stories. A provocative link is included here and there for the purposes of advancing the discussion in some obvious and appropriate way. Many articles repeat the points that others have made. This repetition is necessary to show how many people with solid reputations describe the BBB's unethical behavior in the same way.
Items posted on 4/26/10
McIntrye Law Firm, PLLC: Letter to CCCB, dated 9/29/2008 (a must see)
Carpet Cleaner Bucks BBB Tactics; Stands on Own Merits
California: Company Goes From F to A Without Joining BBB (with remarkable comments)
Connecticut: Ticket Provider Responds to Heavy-handed BBB
Items posted on 4/21/10
Santa Barbara: Member of BBB Troubled by BBB Sales Tactics, Manipulation of Rating and Complaints, and Endorsement of One Member Business over Others in Same Category
Consumeraffairs.com, Richard Berman: BBB's New Rating System Draws Fire
BBB Ratings/Integrity Questioned After Review of NBA Reliability Reports, Celtics D-? Nuggets A+?
Items posted on 3/30/10
Colorado: Building Contractor Details Troubling Experience with BBB
Lubbock Avalanche-Journal, Mary Flood: Embattled Dating Firm Turns Tables on BBB
Baylor University: Student Paper Editorial Pegs Problems with BBB Rating System
Consumer Debt Settlement Company Responds to Previously Undisclosed Bias in BBB Rating System
Items posted on 2/21/10
bbbRoundUp.com Reveals 2008 Financial Data for 111 BBBs
Minnesota Lawyer, Michelle Lore: "Making the Grade" Questions the BBB's Ability to Rate Attorneys
Minnesota: Long-Standing Law Firm Blasts BBB Rating System
Supply Company Webpage Exposes BBB
EddieOnEverything.com: Blogger Alleges BBB High Pressure Sales Tactics
New Mexico Business Weekly, Thomas Munro: Jeweler Sues Better Business Bureau Over Bad Grade
(See related BEB commentary: New Mexico BBB President Reveals BBB Oblique Lawsuit Defense Tactics)
bbbRoundUp.com Uncovers BBB Discrimination and Conflict of Interest Issues in Rating System
bbbRoundUp.com: Another Former BBB Employee Fesses Up
bbbRoundUp.com: Numberous BBBs Fail to Respond to Complaints within 2 Weeks-Rated F
Items posted on 1/10/2010
Paul Burri, Noozhawk.com: Business Advisor Questions BBB Practices
Consumerist.com: Consumers Overwhelmingly Recognize BBB Futility, Unethical Practices
Items posted on 12/2/2009
The Owners' Advocate, David Humphrey: "Why We Ended Our Affiliation with the Better Business Bureau"
California: General Contractor Reports Better Business Bureau "is a SCAM"
Items posted on 10/31/2009
City-Data.com: Alleged Business Owner Sounds Off Against BBB Tactics
Massachusetts: Contractor Cites BBB as "Worthless...without Authority"
Chuck Rosseel: "BBB is Little More Than a Scam"
 Small.JPG){kind=link}
City-Data.com: Consumer Claims BBB Mishandling of Complaint; Business Owner Responds
Items posted 9/1/2009 to 10/30/2009
Franchisor Resists BBB's High Pressure Tactics
SearchEngineGuide.com, David Wallace: Has the BBB Outlived Its Usefulness?
StartUpNation.com: Is Joining the BBB Worth It?
StartUpNation.com: Is the Better Business Bureau all that or just overblown hype?
Wikipedia Recognizes BBB Criticism
MSNBC-Your Biz, Eva Tahmincioglu: Why the BBB Deserves a FFF
Florida Trends, Cynthia Barnett (as quoted at carwashguys.com): Better Business Bureau Calling . . .
The Better Business Bureau: It is not what you think!
SmartMoney Magazine, Neil Palmer: Is the BBB Too Cozy With the Firms It Monitors?
BBB California Chapter President Allegedly Paid $245,000 According to Tax Returns
BBB California Chapter Reports $4,598,000 in Total Revenue in 1999
SearchRank.com, David Wallace: Better Business Bureau Discriminates Against Online Companies, Part 1
SearchRank.com, David Wallace: Better Business Bureau Discriminates Against Online Companies, Part 2
Diggs.com: Public Reaction to David Wallace Article in SearchRank.com
Minnesota AG Sues Capital One and CCCB Allowed Capital One to Remain a Sponsor/Member
More Details on Nature of MN AG's Suit Against Capital One
NielsenHayden.com/MakingLight, Teresa Neilson Hayden: The Useless Business Bureau
Better Bureau Membership Not Recommended
Bettering the 'Better Business Bureau'
DemocraticUnderground.com Discussion Board: Better Business Bureau -- To Join or Not to Join
ProgramCritique.com: Better Business Bureau -- Not Recommended
ConsumerAffairs.com, Richard Berman: BBB's New Rating System Draws Fire
PrestonLee.com, Preston Lee: Better Business Bureau Racketeering
Orange County Register: Jan Norman: Is the Better Business Bureau's rating fine or flawed?
bbbRoundup.com Petition To US Congress With Comments
Pennsylvania: Customers Stand Up for Non-member Pet Supplier After BBB Gives F
Beaumont Enterprise (Texas Newspaper), Dee Dixon; Another Reporter Questions BBB's Rating System
Hartford Courant, George Gombossy: BBB Ratings Defy All Logic (Abstract)
Hartford Courant, George Gombossy: BBB May Expel 5 Bureaus (Abstract)
LA Times, David Lazarus: Better Business Bureau grades companies on a peculiar curve
LA Times, David Lazaus: It's not the Best Business Bureau
Charlotte NC Business Owner Allegedly Operates in Good Faith, BBB Doesn't (with Comments)
Desert News, Laura Hancock: BBB changes way it grades firms
Deseret News, Laura Hancock: Local BBB rated company lower with incorrect information
Colombia Tribune, T.J. Greaney: New BBB grade card 'a can of worms'
Washington Company Allegedly Rated C- Within Minutes of Declining to Join BBB
Suite101.com, Karla Reed: BBB Grade, Rating and Complaint Pitfalls
20-year Texas Company Allegedly Goes from A+ to F After Declining BBB Renewal
10-year Connecticut Company Does Not Renew With BBB in Protest over Rating System (See Comments)
California: Company Allegedly Downgraded to B+ From A+ For Declining to Renew With the BBB
Texas: BBB Allegedly Denys MoneyFromHome.com Third Party Endorsements on Reliability Report
Arizona: BBB Refuses Refund After Breach of Good Faith
OnlyReviews.com: BBB Tactics "like civil form of extortion"
Selma Enterprise (California), Dennis Beaver: BBB Has Problem with Credibility
California: Private Investigator Confounds BBB Rep; Friends Claims BBB Promised AAA with Membership
Texas, Waco Tribune, Cindy V. Culp: Better Business Bureau Rating Questioned (with 10 comments) (3/9/10--This a pay-for-view archive link now. The BEB may link up its copy at a later date.)
Virginia Real Estate Professional Questions Value of BBB Membership
Michigan: Professional Movers Blog ID's Rating Discrepancies
SoCal BBB President Allegedly Admits to Problems with Rating System
California: BBB Allegedly Asks Gaming Site Operator for $5000 Fee for Higher Grade (with 4 Comments)
Massachusetts: Consumer Allegedly Dissed by BBB Gets Results with Small Claims Court
Home Inspectors Doubt BBB's Value
Texas: Former Houston BBB Sales Rep Claims 50% commission, Manager Paid over $200k
New York--USA Today: Kodak Blows off BBB, Takes F Rating
California: Doc allegedly harassed by BBB Sales Rep
Paving Companies Allege Misleading BBB Sales Tactics
AlertsForConsumers.com: Consumer Watchdog Warns of BBB's Lack of Reliability
Washington: Remodeler Doesn't Trust the BBB
Email to the Council of Better Business Bureaus on 12/3/09
The problems with BBBs around the United States are rampant.
For a good understanding of what these issues are and what the CBBB and BBBs can do to fix them, please see www.BetterEthicsBureau.org and many associated websites that are linked there.
Please witness for yourself the ever-growing discontent with the way BBBs operate today and in the recent past.
If such abuse of freedom and power by your institution continues, it won't be much longer before this abuse will be public knowledge and will be the undoing of your entire organization.
The venerable Red Cross suffered terrible hits to its reputation in 2002 that almost killed it. Your current policies are setting your nonprofit up for a fall from grace of your own.
Please review the article "A BBB We All Can Live With, A Blueprint for Reform at the BBB" at www.betterethicsbureau.org. (This is a living document and may change from time to time, so you might want to check it again every now and then.)
If you would like to address how your nonprofit is, or plans to become, more transparent and as a result more trustworthy, those things will be published accordingly at the www.betterethicsbureau.org.
The same goes for how you might modify your rating program into one that is more fair to all businesses, more reliable for the general public, and more sustainable in terms of resources required.
One more thing, please understand that BEB.org is still a work in progress. Many more features are in the works and will be developed as time allows and the situation demands.
May the most ethical path among us win out in the end.
I am perfectly willing to stand down when BBBs once again stand up.
Until then, please know that there is now a serious watchdog watching the watchdog.
Best Regards,
Scott Jordan
If you wish to contact the CBBB directly, you may do so using the webform at Link to CBBB Email Contact Form.
A Blueprint for BBB Reform
by Scott Jordan
(Last Updated: December 16, 2009)
A BEB original, this document assists the reformation of the BBB into an institution we all can live with.
As a "living document", it will be changed and updated according to the collective wisdom of the marketplace. It will note any changes the BBB makes to correct the underlying concerns in an acceptable way.
If the BBB doesn't move to address these issues on its own, this document will serve as a blueprint for legislation to curb BBB-style slander and libel of business reputations.
This legislation may also require non-profit whistleblowers to be transparent themselves, so the general public can decide if the non-profit has the funding, manpower, expertise, and infrastructure to responsibly fulfill all its stated missions.
Legislation should make it illegal for a non-profit whistleblowers to mislead the mislead the general public in any way to make a case and so gain unwarranted influence in the marketplace.
This document summarizes the thinking of many concerned with the direction the BBB is heading.
It was born in the hour after a lengthy, fairly reasoned discussion Scott Jordan (primary author of this document) had with the alleged supervisor of the accreditation department, Phoenix AZ BBB, on November 17, 2009.
She asked what he thought could be done to improve the BBB rating system. He recommended a few things to her. During the course of this conversation, he realized there was no central document to guide the changes that critics of the BBB feel are necessary.
So here it is now.
Concerning the Rating System and Reliability Reports
1. Rate businesses with a "No Rating" when information is insufficient for the BBB to rate the business as "Satisfactory", while listing what information the BBB does have for the business and the source(s) of the information.
2. Businesses who have submitted information for review by the BBB are given an "Under Review" rating with a statement like "The business has recently submitted information to the BBB for consideration. The BBB will establish a rating of Satisfactory, Watch, or Unsatisfactory after it completes its investigation of this business."
3. All businesses who have submitted information for review and passes the BBB's verification process rated are "Satisfactory".
4. Place a "Watch" rating on businesses when things look like they are going south--like when a legitimate complaint goes unanswered, or the number of complaints increase compared to businesses of similar characteristics, or advertising issues surface, or licensing problems are apparent, etc.
5. Rate a company as "Unsatisfactory" when criteria for an "Unsatisfactory" rating are met, as established and published on BBB websites.
6. Rate new businesses with questionable operations but with no complaints initially as "Watch" and explain why on Reliability Reports. After a probation period, rate the business "Satisfactory", again explaining why the rating was changed.
7. Designate a company as "Accredited" and "Satisfactory" when they pay the membership fee, explaining what makes accredited businesses different.
Resolutions for Other Issues with Reliability Reports
1. Businesses should be able to respond to any negative information on a Reliability Report, directly on their Reliability Report.
2. The BBB statement that it does guarantee the accuracy of the Reliability Reports should be at the top of the Reports near the "Start With Trust" slogan so as to not mislead the public.
3. The BBB should list the sources of information contained on the Reliability Report, summarizing the extent they did research on a particular company. This would allow the public to weight the report accordingly. Listing actual sources can easily be done any number of ways.
4. The BBB should plainly list those characteristics of businesses it does not take into consideration when they establish a rating for a business, including the following:
a) Ownership/management education and experience
b) Financial reports
c) Insurance
d) Customer surveys
e) Complaint resolution practices or any other customer service features
f) On-site visit of a business's facilities
g) On-site and/or on-location evaluation of the business's operations
5. The BBB should state when all the information on a Reliability Report was last reviewed and updated.
Resolution for General Issues with the BBB
Membership Sales Tactics
1. Do not promise anything besides the benefits of accreditation, supporting the BBB's efforts to breed trust in the marketplace, and the growing list of services that the BBB provides members.
2. Leave a business's reputation out of the sales equation until the BBB completes it investigation (as cursory as this investigation may currently be).
Complaints against the BBB
1. Each BBB should list the record of complaints against it, and make this complaint record public, the same it does for the businesses it rates.
2. The BBB Board of Directors should review complaints against the BBB and determine if all such complaints were treated prudently by BBB staffers and certify this investigation to the public.
3. Each BBB should have an appeal process that is independent of BBB staff and Board of Directors. This appeal board should publish its findings on important issues to the public, protecting the integrity of the entire process, ensuring to all the BBB is in all ways ethical and precise, as much as any human institution can be. If qualifed volunteers can't be found for such a board, the cost of the appeal process should be born with membership fees.
Transparency at the BBB
1. As a non-profit whistleblowing institution, it should fully disclose its staffing and other infrastructure chararacteristics so the public may ascertain to what extent it has the resoures to accomplish its many stated missions.
2. Besides the complaint data against it already mentioned, the BBB should disclose important operating statistics on a periodic basis such as number of new business ratings completed, number of current business ratings fully reviewed, number of current accredited businesses, financial statements, a breakdown of complaints it handled on behalf of the general public, and a summary of legal actions against it--resolved and pending.
If have anything you would like to add or edit about this document, please email your input to Messages@BetterEthicsBureau.org. It will be aptly considered and discussed with you.
September 3, 2009 (Edited further on 11/20/2009)
by Scott Jordan, freelance writer and business owner (Jordan Janitorial), Mesa, AZ
How Reliable Are the BBB's New Ratings of Local Businesses?
Many fear that Better Business Bureaus have played fast and loose with the reputations of millions of businesses across the United States.
Here is strong evidence that this may be the case.
Steve Bernas, President and CEO of the Chicago area Better Business Burea, has allegedly stated that his BBB rated more than 102,000 northern Illinois businesses with new ratings that went into effect June 1, 2009.
Bernas says his BBB rated more than 102,000 businesses with a grade of a grade F through A+, according to a formula that takes into account 17 weighted factors. (See the Bernas statement in the Darien Chamber of Commerce Newsletter, June 2009.)
These factors include the research-intensive components of licensing requirements, history of government actions, on-going analysis of current advertising practices, analysis of any complaint data, and whether or not a business operates in violation of the law. And all this supposedly comes after the BBB compiles and verifies a long list of basic facts for each business.
Bernas, who assumed his present duties as CEO in January 2009, did not mention the amount and the quality of resources that were, and remain, committed to this effort or how ratings are actually generated, approved and periodically reviewed.
Because of the pure magnitude of the project Bernas described, savvy business people have no confidence in what they know about any BBB's ability to generate and maintain reliable ratings with 13 levels of distinction, or 14, if the category of "No Rating" is included.
With the obvious exception of a company that is clearly operating in a questionable manner, many are convinced the BBB is not capable of determining that one business is more reliable or trustworthy than another. They also believe the public is duped by the BBB accordingly.
Here's why.
The BBB is not revealing to the general public how much time and expertise goes into each rating or how ratings are actually generated, approved and periodically reviewed. However, based on Berna's statements, we can get an idea about how much time, money and infrastructure would be needed to do the kind of work Bernas says was done.
Assuming the Chicago BBB spent one minute researching, evaluating, weighting and recording each of the 17 points for 102,000 businesses, 14 full-time employees could complete this work in one year.
Of course, 17 minutes is not nearly enough time to fully vet a business on each of the 17 points that Bernas mentioned. (For a complete list and explanation of all 17 points visit any BBB website. Some sources list the number of factors at 16, but 17 was used for calculations in this article per the statement attributed to Bernas.)
More likely, it would take 147 staffers a full year to research and compile reports for 102,000 businesses, if a minimum of three hours were spent researching, compiling and verifying the data, and evaluating each business on the 17 points.
One would also think the BBB screens and hires a higher standard of worker to carefully compile reports, many of which will go on to damage hard-won business reputations.
Let's say the BBB has to pay a minimum of $40,000 in salary and benefits to attract and retain business analysts of sufficient caliber. Thus, the total bill for the frontline wages alone would be $5.9 million.
In addition, the Chicago BBB, in this case, would need infrastructure to support 150 personnel with all the supervision, management, and administrative overhead as well.
It is not likely that each BBB hires and trains a staff to rate businesses to this degree of responsibility. As a result, many wonder exactly how the BBB does rate businesses and then maintain those ratings once they are published.
Because of the tremendous impact the BBB has had on the business community with its rating system, it should have no problem in answering the following questions and others like them.
Questions every business owner (not rated A+) should ask their local BBB
1) What resources did the BBB use to develop and maintain the rating for my business and my competition, a rating that is now harming the reputation of my business in the marketplace?
2) How is the information gathered by BBB telemarketers verified and analyzed before a rating is made?
3) Who made the final decision on the rating my business received? May I speak with him or her? Will that person disclose all the information in my file that was used to generate my rating and certify that all such information was released to me?
4) What qualifications do BBB business analysts have to rate one business in my market as more reliable and trustworthy than another? For example, how what qualifications do they have to rate one dentist above another? Where are these qualifications published so the public can determine whether or not this business analyst was qualified to make such an important judgment?
5) Why does the BBB rate member businesses higher than non-member businesses? Why is this not plainly disclosed to the public on reliability reports, instead of being buried deep within BBB websites?
6) Why doesn't the BBB give businesses the opportunity to defend themselves on BBB reliability reports?
8. No one can find where the BBB lists the complaints consumers and businesses file against it. Does the BBB publish such data the same way it does for the businesses and charities it rates? If so, where? If not, why not? Wouldn't a favorable complaint history improve the credibility of the BBB and make it appear less hypocritical?
Just after the rating system was put in place in the metro-Phoenix area, the BBB told me as a small business owner and a member of the BBB at the time, they would not respond to questions similar to those above. The Phoenix-area BBB referred me to the Council of Better Business Bureaus in Arlington, VA, which is what the CBBB directs their affiliates to do in cases like mine. However, my letter to the CBBB of January 7, 2009 remains unanswered.
Like most members of an organization, I expect the people who took my money and signed me up to answer my questions. The CBBB did not sign me up or take my money. Besides, my BBB obviously knows the answers to these questions. To their great discredit, they chose not answer them.
Many are also not happy with the way BBB sales reps, most of which appear to be paid on commission, try to leverage the rating system to pressure them into becoming members.
But business owners are fighting back. California's bbbRoundUp.com and Georgia's MechanicsResponds.com are two good examples of what is being done to resist the BBB's heavy hand on businesses. BetterEthicsBureau.org references a large number of business owners and consumers from around the United States who have put their greivences with the BBB on the Internet for all to see.
Wikipedia, the online encyclopedia, lists a growing number of references critical of the BBB, including BBBRoundUp.com.
I believe that Better Business Bureaus will change the rating system to be more business-friendly before they will let anyone know how they actually produced the initial ratings.
Contact Scott Jordan at Messages@BetterEthicsBureau.org. He will consult with executive leadership of trade and civic organizations as well as speak at trade and civic meetings upon invitation. He will also interview with media sources seeking to expose the BBB's rating system as unethical, hostile and unfair to most businesses. He will also assist in any criminal investigation or civil litigation against the BBB upon request
Personal references provided upon request.
Copyright by Scott Jordan, 2009. Please reprint without charge--just let me know at scott@gojordan.us.
END OF PRESS RELEASE #1
September 3, 2009 (Edited further on 11/18/2009)
by Scott Jordan, freelance writer and business owner (Jordan Janitorial), Mesa, AZ
What you can do to limit damage the BBB may cause your business
YOUR BBB SURVIVAL GUIDE
Because of legal loopholes concerning certain non-profit whistleblowing organizations, courts have not been able to compel the BBB to be truthful and accurate in its reliability reports. To date, BBBs are basically exempt from the same libel and slander laws that apply to others in the business community. And the BBB has milked these legal loopholes for all they are worth.
So, if you are not happy with your business's reliability report forget about suing the BBB under current circumstances. You are not likely to win in court where so many others businesses have already failed.
Apparently, the BBB takes full advantage of these loopholes to perpetuate its current anti-business practices. This may also be why the BBB does not reveal how it actually rates businesses, beyond putting an outline skeleton rating scheme on their websites.
So what can the business community do to limit the damage of an overly aggressive and hostile BBB?
The answers are simple and effective.
First, don't join the BBB. The BBB depends on membership fees to survive. Without membership fees from the same businesses it terrorizes, it must change the way it operates or die.
Don't worry that the public will be without a consumer watchdog. In today's world, there are plenty of public and private institutions that can easily fill in any void of consumer advocacy left by a shrinking BBB.
Besides, if you join the BBB and the BBB doesn't rate you an "A+", you just paid the BBB to lower your standing in the marketplace.
Concerning A+ ratings, unless your business is 7 years-old, there is no way you can be rated "A+", even if you joined the BBB.
Most non-member businesses are rated a half-grade below BBB members, all other things being equal. Many non-member businesses find this unfair, but will accept the slight reduction rather than give in to the BBB's extortion-like, self-serving tactic this feature of the rating system represents.
After seven years, your business will be eligible for an "A" rating. At this point, your business has been successful without the BBB, so why join? You can still advertise your "A" rating with the BBB at no cost to you, as long as you don't use the BBB's logos and trademarks or claim to be a BBB Accredited Business.
Again, by not joining the BBB you send a message that you choose not to support the BBB's unethical behavior. In this way, you will contribute to something the courts cannot currently do and that is get the BBB to change its ways.
Instead of joining the BBB, sign up with organizations that enhance your standing in the marketplace, ones that may lobby local, state and Federal government to legislate against the hostile tactics of the BBB. These organizations may also represent your company and others as a group to your attorney general and/or district attorney.
Therefore, your local chamber of commerce or trade association may be a far better choice for your hard-earned dollars and participation, if the BBB is to be stopped.
For companies not currently rated by the BBB
If your company is not currently rated by the BBB, avoid the BBB at all costs. If the BBB calls, hang up immediately even though they may say they have an urgent message for the owner. The urgent message is likely to be that your company is nominated for membership in the BBB, a common BBB ploy.
What to do if the BBB lists your business on its website
To date, the BBB will mail complaints to you. If you get a complaint, they will place your company on the BBB website whether you like it or not.
The BBB will likely give you an "F" if you don't close the loop with them according to the guidelines in the complaint letter they will send you.
If the BBB chooses to list your business on its website for whatever reason, there is nothing you can do to stop it.
If the BBB lists your business, it is beneficial to cooperate with the BBB to the fullest extent possible, without joining it.
Once the BBB has your company listed on their website, ensure the BBB has all the information they need to give your company the highest rating possible, no matter how upset you might be with the whole process. Complete information can raise ratings significantly. A higher rating will lessen the damage the BBB will likely cause your business.
If you need a second opinion on your finalized rating, you may reach Scott Jordan at scott@gojordan.us. He has reviewed thousands of reliability reports nationwide for trends. If your rating is out of line, he may help you with the evidence you need to negotiate a higher rating.
Once your rating is finalized, print a screen shot of your reliability report with your grade and date of the print showing. You can print a screen shot by holding down the ALT key and pressing the Print Screen key. Then paste the screen shot to an open document or email and save.
Because ratings can change for no apparent reason, at least every three months, or within three days after anyone from the BBB contacts you, check your reliability report for any changes including your rating and complaint status.
Research has shown that some companies find out they had complaints for the first time on their reliability report and were rated F as a result.
Do the print screen thing each time your reliability report changes. If things are going south for you, this information may help you protect your business against the BBB in a multitude of public forums.
Other things you can do
As implied earlier, join and participate in groups that will advocate for your business to local, state and Federal governments. Some groups will even assist in writing actual legislation, making laws that will stop the abuse the BBB now inflicts on good business people, their families, and employees.
The Attorney General's office cannot take your case against the BBB as an individual company, but it will not ignore the demands of many hundreds of businesses organized in a worthy cause of fairness and justice. Again, your civic group or trade association may be a good place to get this process started as well.
Identify BBB board members and their businesses. Recommend they strongly and publically advocate for businesses in your area, or request that they resign in protest over the BBB's patently unfair and anti-business practices. If board members persist in their private and public support of the BBB, expose their support of the BBB's unethical practices accordingly.
Identify media and public relation sources that will help expose the unethical aspects of the BBB rating system. Work with them to counter the BBB's growing and undeserved influence in the marketplace. These sources may include television, radio, newspapers, and business journals and magazines, trade journals. Reporters who have questioned the BBB's tactics in the past are a good place to start. Distribution of information through trade associations and civic groups will also be helpful.
Contact Scott Jordan at Messages@BetterEthicsBureau.org. He will consult with executive leadership of trade and civic organizations as well as speak at trade and civic meetings upon invitation. He will also interview with media sources seeking to expose the BBB's rating system as unethical, hostile and unfair to most businesses. He will also assist in any criminal investigation or civil ligation against the BBB upon request.
Personal references provided upon request.
Copyright 2009, by Scott Jordan. Please reprint without charge--just let me know at Messages@BetterEthicsBureau.org.
END OF PRESS RELEASE #2
September 8, 2009 (last edit: 10/2/09)
by Scott Jordan, freelance writer and business owner (Jordan Janitorial), Mesa, AZ
Six Strategies to Curb Unethical Behavior at the Better Business Bureau
A rising tide of sources cite the BBB for failing to operate at the same high standards that it demands of the rest of the marketplace. Websites such as BetterEthicsBureau.org, BBBRoundUp.com and MechanicsReponse.com reveal the growing discontent with the BBB nationwide.
For example, under the guise of its slogan "Start with Trust", an increasing number claim the BBB:
1) Uses extortion-like tactics to sell memberships;
2) Favors fee-paying businesses when resolving consumer complaints and when determining ratings;
3) Misleads the public and harms businesses by not fully disclosing how it actually rates millions of businesses;
4) Covers up the lack of qualifications of those who make the ratings;
5) Denies businesses the opportunity to refute BBB negative statements directly on reliability reports;
6) Does not disclose to the public the complaints or law suits filed against it, and;
7) Misleads the public by putting "Start with Trust" in bold letters at the top of top of reliability reports while stating that accuracy is "not guaranteed" in the fine print at the bottom.
The Better Ethics Bureau has conducted an extensive study of what has not worked to counter the BBB's undeserved influence in the marketplace and why.
As a result, to finally stop the unethical behavior of the BBB, the Better Ethics Bureau recommends:
1) Writing local, state and Federal laws that make non-profit consumer advocacy groups that more accountable and transparent to the public;
2) Increased exposure of BBB unethical practices in the media so every citizen can judge who is unethical and who is not;
3) Hundreds, if not thousands of complaints, to attorney generals and district attorneys, empowering them to investigate the BBB for libel, as well as unfair, extortion-like and deceptive business practices for the good of the general public;
4) That business owners to stop paying membership dues;
5) Local communities make it undesirable for a respectful business person to be on a BBB board of directors; and
6) Civic and trade organizations are invited, informed and empowered to take action against the BBB and help with the first five strategies where they are able.
The accomplishment of any one of these six may be enough to force the BBB to play nice, or even flat-out kill it. The accumulative effect of all six happening at the same time would just be, well, an awesome thing to see.
Contact Scott Jordan at Messages@BetterEthicsBureau.org. He will consult with executive leadership of trade and civic organizations as well as speak at trade and civic meetings upon invitation. He will also interview with media sources seeking to expose the BBB's rating system as unethical, hostile and unfair to most businesses. He will also assist in any criminal investigation or civil ligation against the BBB upon request.
Personal references provided upon request.
Copyright 2009, by Scott Jordan. Please reprint without charge--just let me know at Messages@BetterEthicsBureau.org.
END OF PRESS RELEASE #3
How the Better Ethics Bureau Came to Be
The Better Ethics Bureau is all about facing down the BBB. The BBB needlessly harms untold thousands of good business owners, their families, employees, and in too many instances, customers as well. As I have come to find out, it's been this way for at least two decades and it needs to stop.
This is the story of how the BEB can to be.
I joined the Phoenix-area BBB in June 2008 and I was given the satisfactory rating that I sought.
In January 2009, the BBB changed the satisfactory rating to A- without warning. Where before I was on equal footing with all the other janitorial companies listed on the BBB website, this new rating put my business in the bottom third of my competition, with only two businesses rated worse than mine.
I asked for my money back, telling the BBB that it used my money (and the information I gave it) against my company's best interest.
They denied any breach of good faith and would not refund my money. This experience taught me that the BBB does not practice what it preaches when it comes to customer satisfaction. I have first-hand knowledge the BBB will put money before principle.
I also wanted to speak with the person who rated my business. I wanted to know the qualifications this person had to rate one janitorial company as more trustworthy and reliable than another. I wanted to talk with the person who felt comfortable enough to parse thousands of businesses of all types into 13 different levels of distinction with such confidence that he or she could still sleep at night, knowing that thousands of solid businesses would be harmed in the process.
Instead of answering my questions, the Phoenix BBB referred me to its parent, the Council of Better Business Bureaus in Arlington, VA. I wrote a letter to the CCCB on January 7, 2009. To date, I have not received a response. I haven't pursued the CBBB, knowing in advance it would be a grand waste of time and effort.
Besides, I gave my money to the Phoenix BBB. Supposedly an independent office, it could give me my money back if it wanted to--and answer my questions. However, the Phoenix BBB simply chose not to do so.
So where do I file my complaint to let the public know that the BBB breached its contract with me and then wouldn't give my money back?
What I learned from this experience, like so many before me, the BBB seldom hesitates to posts complaints against any business for all the world to see, but the BBB does not do the same for itself.
Without a clear record of the complaints against the BBB and how it handled those complaints, how could the public tell if the BBB is working like it should?
Taking some kind of action, I posted my experience to www.ripoff.com. Mine is report # 410467l.
I have been an advocate against the BBB ever since.
If I had renewed my membership this year, I would be rated A, and I was rated A until the mid-August 2009 when the BBB finally accepted the fact that I was not renewing my membership. Soon after, I was re-rated back to A-.
In late spring 2009, the Phoenix BBB invited me to quote for the carpet cleaning at its office. I turned this opportunity down. I thought the offer to quote was like an offer of hush money or the result of guilty conscience.
Approximately 100 A or A+ carpet cleaners/janitorial companies are within 10 miles of the BBB office. Why would it ask an A- janitorial company from 19 miles away for a quote?
I asked for an explanation of the selection criteria and for the names of the other businesses that were invited to bid. After all, I was a member of the BBB in good standing at the time, why shouldn't my organization share these things with me?
Maybe it is because I also reminded the sender that her boss had stated publically that higher-rated businesses were more reliable than lesser-rated ones. I asked if he knew that she was going out to an A- company 19 miles away from her office. Of course, I got no response to these questions either.
As can be seen, I come to the anti-BBB table on the basis of principle. I didn't believe in January 2009 that I could trust the BBB and I don't believe I can trust it now.
The American Dental Association doesn't rate dentists, member or non-member. It knows there are too many factors and those factors change too rapidly to be fair and consistent to all dentists. Yet the BBB thinks it can rate every company in every city of the United States and Canada and keep those ratings fair and reliable.
Such arrogance and implausibility is not lost on the business people in the marketplace. Such deception will not be lost on the general public for much longer either.
And then there are the BBB's inconsistencies of its complaint handling system and extortion-like and deceptive sales tactics. These are also matters of great concern in the business world.
The BBB may do a few things right for charity and its employees (and I am guessing here), but its core operations, the things that make it live, are as unethical as the day is long.
Okay, we all can see the problems, so what can be done about to stop the BBB?
Let me share with you a few things that haven't worked so far.
I posted a few negative reports on the Internet.
I spoke with the legal counsel for the Phoenix BBB who said that he just could not find anything actionable in what I was saying--no surprise here but it was a first-hand look into how the BBB has defended itself.
I did a ton of research and eventually found BBBRoundUp.com and started to communicate with Jimmie Rivers. I was looking for anyone that was successful in bringing the BBB to heel. There are hints of success against the BBB, but nothing that I could sink my teeth into.
I filed a complaint with the Arizona Attorney General's office. When I got a letter back saying they couldn't help one individual, I called the office and spoke with a representative. In response to my questions, she told me that if the things I was saying were true and more businesses would file the same kind of complaint, the AG's office would likely start an investigation of the BBB. She assured me that the AG would investigate the BBB as readily as any other company.
I called a bunch of poorly-rated dentists. None of them were happy with the BBB. A few of them didn't know they were rated poorly. Others thought complaints were resolved that weren't. Many had BBB horror stories to share.
I even went underground. Jimmie Rivers is the fictitious name of the man behind BBB Round Up. I was the BBB Avenger. Kind of silly now that I think of it. As the BBB Avenger, I anonymously faxed and emailed as many businesses not rated A+ as I could find fax numbers and email addresses.
I got some response back, including a prominent local businessman, but on the whole, the response was disappointing. A caped crusader works well in the movies but not so well for underground faxing and emailing campaigns.
I could not find any record of a successful lawsuit against the BBB, though I am sure that some did have success. But in the end, I couldn't see footing the bill for what was likely to be a very expensive loss.
So I can't win in court. My masked man bit didn't work. Firing up one dentist at a time was tedious and depressing with no telling when the scales might tip against the BBB.
I thought about going to an investigative reporter, but again, I am just one company with a rather long and confusing, and at the time, incoherent tale.
The story of the BBB's unethical behavior is not big enough, because it is not clear enough. There are so many issues with the BBB that each issue dilutes the strength of the other.
For almost two decades, businesses have begged the BBB to recognize their legitimate grievances, but to little avail. This means what we have done in the past hasn't worked.
What do we have to do differently to make for the real changes in the BBB so many are seeking?
Born of the failures, came the answers.
1) We need local, state and Federal laws that make non-profit consumer advocacy groups more accountable and transparent to the public.
2) Instead of winning civilly in the courthouse, we need to win in the court of public opinion, where every citizen can judge for themselves who is right and who is wrong.
3) We need hundreds, if not thousands of complaints, to attorney generals and district attorneys, empowering them to investigate the BBB for libel, as well as unfair and deceptive business practices for the good of the general public.
4) We need business owners to stop paying membership dues.
5) We need to make it undesirable for a respectful business person to be on a BBB board of directors.
6) We need to invite, inform and empower civic and trade organizations to take action against the BBB.
The accomplishment of any one of these six may be enough to force the BBB to play nice, or even flat-out kill it. The accumulative effect of all six happening at the same time would just be, well, an awesome thing to see.
How can we make these six things live?
We need a platform, a foundation, a unifying entity. We need a place where all can come to see what is working and what is not.
Towards this end, on September 1, 2009, I founded the Better Ethics Bureau with accompanying website.
Like the impactful BBBRoundUp.com before it, BetterEthicsBureau.org consolidates relevant links into a growing list of references critical of the BBB.
The magnitude of the list is already impressive. This site will make research about the BBB much easier for decision-making, report-writing and presentation-building.
As needed, the site is expandable by state, so that each state's culture can be taken into account when formulating plans of action and citizens can see what is going on in their particular state.
Examples of pages for each state may be:
1) Lists of BBB board members (and their businesses) that support the BBB and its unethical practices with their continued service on the board
2) Links to complaint forms for the attorney general and district attorneys
3) References to state laws and proposed changes to the law
4) Press releases and media stories and other references common to a state, including those reporters and publications who are critical of the BBB
5) People and organizations who are out front in the fight against the BBB on a state and local level
6) Any other item that would get the job done in each state
The Better Ethics Bureau also provides an institution from which press releases can be issued, press releases that may be published verbatim or referenced by more mainstream media.
There is now a foundation and a road map. Now all we have to do is make it happen.
Garage Door Opens to Questionable BBB Ratings
November 27, 2009
by Scott Lee Jordan, freelance writer and business owner (Jordan Janitorial), Mesa, AZ
Here's another way to stop unethical behavior at the Better Business Bureau--don't use BBB accredited businesses where you can find good non-accredited businesses.
This is exactly what I did when my garage door spring broke.
Using BBB on-line resources (that BBB members pay for), I looked for a non-accredited garage door company that had little or no complaints.
Here's what I found.
Business |
BBB Member |
BBB Rating |
Years in Business |
Complaints: Last 36 Months |
Complaints: Last 12 Months |
Precision Door Services |
Yes |
A |
9 |
13 |
4 |
Stapley Garage Door |
No |
A- |
23 |
2 |
0 |
Based on Phoenix BBB Reliability Reports on November 25, 2009 |
|||||
All complaints were resolved |
|||||
Stapley Garage Door fit my criteria--not a BBB member with only two complaints, both resolved.
I called Stapley Garage Door and 2 hours later my garage door was fixed. They installed a new spring, adjusted the side cables, lubed the track, wheels, and panel hinges, and tested the door to make sure everything was good. The billl? Only $150! They would have discounted the spring another 10%, but I said no thanks to the discount. I was beyond happy with the price and the service. It was something I could do to show how much I appreciated what they did for me.
Maybe Precision Door Services would have done just as well. I don't know. I wasn't going to take any chances with them--a BBB accredited business, rated A, with 13 complaints, 4 in the last year.
According to Matt Fehling, CEO of the Phoenix BBB, I am supposed to trust a BBB accredited, A rated, Precision Door Service (with 13 complaints) more than I should trust a non-accredited, A- company (with 2 complaints). That's why the BBB came up with the rating system in the first place, right? Sorry, Matt. No this time.
Stop the BBB by not supporting those who support such nonsense.
Instead, find and use good companies--outstanding companies--that have made the courageous decision to say no to the BBB and stand by their own reputations in the marketplace, like Stapley Garage Door.
Contact Scott Jordan at Messages@BetterEthicsBureau.org He will consult with executive leadership of trade and civic organizations as well as speak at trade and civic meetings upon invitation. He will also interview with media sources seeking to expose the BBB's rating system as unethical, hostile and unfair to most businesses. He will also assist in any criminal investigation or civil ligation against the BBB upon request.
Personal references provided upon request.
Copyright 2009, by Scott Jordan. Please reprint without charge--just let me know at Messages@BetterEthicsBureau.org.
BBB Gives Troubled Banks Passing Grades
February 21, 2010
By Scott Lee Jordan, freelance writer and business owner
On Friday, February 19, 2010, the Associated Press reported four more US banks were shut down by Federal authorities.
None of these banks received an F rating from the Better Business Bureau before they were closed.
One was rated B+. Another was rated B-. The other two were not listed.
The BBB began rating US businesses nationwide on a scale of A+ to F at the end of 2008.
Yet it appears the BBB and its rating system cannot be relied upon to anticipate bank failures.
Of course, if the public cannot rely on the BBB about something as important as bank failures, how can the public rely upon the BBB to decide on which flower shop or attorney or any other product or service to use?
Banks Shuttered on 2/19/10 |
Location |
BBB Rating* |
| La Jolla Bank | La Jolla, CA | B+ |
| La Coste Bank | La Coste, TX | Not Listed |
| George Washington Bank | Orland Park, IL | Not Listed |
| Marco Community Bank | Marco Island, FL | B- |
*BBB Rating as of February 21, 2010 |
||
Link to AP news article as posted at DrudgeReport.com: Banks in Calif., Ill., Fla., Texas are shut down
Copyright 2010, by Scott Jordan. Please reprint without charge--just let me know at Messages@BetterEthicsBureau.org.
New Mexico BBB President Reveals BBB Oblique Lawsuit Defense Tactics
February 21, 2010
By Scott Lee Jordan, freelance writer and business owner
New Mexico BBB President, Jerry Shipman, revealed to the New Mexico Business Weekly how the BBB defends itself against lawsuits by businesses it trashes for defamation and libel.
Here's an excerpt from a January 2009 article titled "Jeweler sues Better Business Bureau over bad grade", by Thomas Munro.
Shipman said . . . the courts have established that the BBB has a “qualified privilege” – meaning that, as long as it is doing what it normally and professedly does, its publications are not defamatory although they could harm a business’s reputation. The qualified privilege requires that the BBB not act in a malicious manner . . .
Though the BBB advises the general public it can "Start With Trust" in the boldest of terms, it oftentimes wins lawsuits simply by not taking a stand on anything it says or does.
The BBB seems to rely on the small print of its disclaimers and the huge amount of wriggle room left in operating guidelines to win lawsuits rather than answer directly any charges of libel and defamation brought on by an offended party.
This wacky lawsuit defense tactic leads many to think the BBB knows it is grossly unaccountable for any of its actions and works hard to keep it that way.
Yet the BBB still enjoys a large measure of unwarranted influence in the marketplace. How much influence? For starters, BBBs nationwide collected $156 million in 2008, mostly from businesses who don't know they are perpetuating such a questionable organization.
Recently the Better Ethics Bureau recommended several ways besides the court system to curb the BBB's abusive practices. They are:
1. Don't join the BBB
2. Register complaints with local attorney generals and district attorneys
3. Join local civic and trade associations
4. Encourage local civic and trade associations to advocate against the BBB
5. Share your story with local investigative reporters
6. Ask local legislatures to refine laws making institutions like the BBB subject to the same libel and defamation laws as the rest of the business world
7. Take every appropriate public opportunity, including your business's websites, to expose BBB practices and business ethics for what they are
8. Patronize non-BBB businesses that have been unfairly treated by the BBB, while avoiding BBB-member businesses
9. File complaints about the BBB with your local BBB and the National Council of Better Business Bureaus (NCBBB)
10. Write about your experiences with the BBB to local newspapers and online as appropriate
11. Help educate BBB employees about how the BBB really operates whenever you speak with them
To limit the damage an out-of-control BBB can cause your business:
1. If you have not been rated by the BBB, avoid the BBB at all costs.
2. If the BBB calls you, ask questions about BBB practices and explain why you won't join. Experience has shown they will rarely call you except to get you to join. They will mail you any complaints.
3. Fully cooperate with any formal request for information the BBB may ask for, being careful you are actually responding to the BBB (lots of scamming going on in this regard).
4. Answer any BBB complaints against your business truthfully and immediately. Stay on top of complaints until they are resolved. One unresolved complaint can net a business an F rating.
5. Check your status with the BBB every month or so. The BBB will not tell you when they have changed your rating, or have given you one. Take action immediately if your rating is B+ or below. The lower your rating, the more chance you have of raising it if you cooperate.
As distasteful as it may be to cooperate with the BBB, the BEB feels, short of joining the BBB, it is worth the effort to do what you can to protect your business's reputation.
All this being said, BEB research has shown that some very successful businesses have blown off the BBB altogether and live with their F rating. As time goes by and the BBB is deemed more and more irrelevant by an educated public, the BEB predicts this will be the case more and more.
Copyright 2010, by Scott Lee Jordan. Please reprint without charge--just let me know at Messages@BetterEthicsBureau.org.
Bank Held "A" Rating from the BBB When Closed by Feds
March 8, 2010
By Scott Lee Jordan, freelance writer and business owner
Centennial Bank of Ogden Utah held an "A" rating from the BBB at the time it was closed down by federal authorities on March 5, 2010.
Based on research completed by the Better Ethics Bureau, the BBB did not consider Centennial Bank's financial condition when it gave the troubled bank its second-highest rating.
It appears that the BBB rated Centennial as "A" primarily because the bank had been operating more than 7 years and had a favorable complaint record with the BBB.
The "A" rating of Centennial Bank in Ogden, Utah strongly indicates the BBB believes if a business has been around for a long time with little or no complaints it is also financially strong and operationally sound as well. The Centennial Bank fiasco shows once again how flawed this BBB reasoning is.
Closer scrutiny reveals the BBB's rating system actually has little to do with trustworthiness or reliability, and that the BBB is content to let the public find out for itself if a business is truly reliable or not.
Of course, Centennial's "A" casts doubt on all BBB ratings, high or low. Certainly, failing banks with A grades cheapen the value of any other high marks the BBB may publish.
Last week, the Better Ethics Bureau pointed out that the BBB gave passing marks to two other banks that were failing and were eventually closed by federal authorities.
If the BBB cannot get it right with something as important to the public as millions of dollars in life savings and bill paying money, how can it be trusted when it comes to auto mechanics, beauty salons or anything other business?
And its rating system isn't the BBB's only problem. Websites such as bbbRoundUp.com, www.BetterEthicsBureau.org, and www.MechanicsResponds.com, and a growing list of journalists, freelance writers, business owners and consumers are exposing a number of ethical and operational problems at the BBB, including its complaint handling system and lack of transparency.
The Better Ethics Bureau warns business owners and consumers alike to be wary of any BBB rating, and the BBB itself, until the BBB corrects these issues and proves to the public it is operating in a trustworthy manner.
Another consequence is that more and more business owners realize that being a member of the BBB may hurt a reputation more than help it. This is partly because the BBB gives A+ ratings only to businesses that pay membership fees, and the public is awakening to this pay-for-play scheme.
Looking ahead, the Better Ethics Bureau believes BBB board members could be named individually in lawsuits for faulty BBB ratings and other BBB deficiencies. As public discontent with the BBB increases, BBB board members will be exposed more and more to culpability issues. The Better Ethics Bureau cautions current and potential BBB board members accordingly. (See BoardSource.org, Richard T. Ingram: Ten Basic Responsibilities of Nonprofit Boards for an example list of non-profit board member responsibilities.)
As for the depositors of the former Centennial Bank of Ogden, Utah, it looks like Zion National Bank will buy only the FDIC insured deposits, according to the Associated Press story linked below--very unfortunate, particularly if any depositors had relied on the BBB's advice to "Start With Trust".
Author's note: As of Monday, March 8, 2010, the Centennial Bank in Ogden, Utah, was still rated "A" by the BBB. Sometime on Tuesday, March 9, 2010, the BBB changed the rating for Centennial Bank to "NR" or Not Rated.
Associated Press (3/5/10), Ieva M. Augstums & Marcy Gordon: Banks Shuttered in Fla., Ill, Md., Utah (as posted at Comcast.net Finance, link updated on 3/27/10)
Copyright 2010, by Scott Lee Jordan. Please reprint without charge--just let me know at Messages@BetterEthicsBureau.org.
BBB Rates Four More Failing Banks "A" or Higher
April 17, 2010
By Scott Lee Jordan, freelance writer and business owner
The Better Business Bureau (BBB) continues to have serious problems with its business rating system.
On April 16, 2010, the FDIC closed three banks rated "A" by the Better Business Bureau and one bank rated "A+".
The three banks rated "A" were City Bank (Lynnwood, Washington), Lakeside Community Bank (Sterling Heights, Michigan) and Butler Bank (Lowell, Massachusetts).
The bank rated A+ was Tamalpais Bank (San Rafael, California), which also is an accredited member of the BBB. The failing bank paid the BBB to earn the BBB's highest rating.
Since February 21, the Better Ethics Bureau documented 7 failing banks that received passing grades from the BBB, 5 of these ratings were A or A+.
This evidence indicates that the BBB has not improved the trustworthiness of an extremely faulty rating system.
None of the reliability reports for these banks indicated the BBB made serious mistakes rating banks in the past, failing to warn the public of the weaknesses in its system.
As a result, the Better Ethics Bureau continues to warn the public to concerning the BBB's lack of reliability and trustworthiness.
As stated in earlier BEB reports, the BBB skirts accountablility for mistakes (such as giving failing banks passing grades) by fully disclaiming all information contained on it reliability reports, including its slogan to "Start With Trust".
In addition, the BBB does not disclose its lack of research on a business's finances, management, operations, or insurance on reliability reports. Nor does the BBB disclose what its does to verify information.
Screen shot of BBB Reilability Report for failed Tamalpais Bank taken on 4/17/10
Screen shot of BBB Reliability Report for failed Butler Bank taken on 4/17/10
Screen shot of BBB Reliability Report for failed City Bank taken on 4/17/10
Screen shot of BBB Reliability Report for failed Lakeside Community Bank taken on 4/19/10
Editor's comment: The next time you hear a BBB CEO defend the BBB's rating system as time-tested and reliable, please feel free to refer to this article as well as others on this subject at this website, www.BBBRoundUp.com and www.BBB-Blog.com.
Related story: FDIC Closes 8 Banks
Copyright 2010, by Scott Lee Jordan. Please reprint without charge--just let me know at Messages@BetterEthicsBureau.org.
BBB Rating Woes Continue: Chicago BBB Rates Two Failing Banks A+, a Third B-
April 25, 2010
By Scott Lee Jordan, freelance writer and business owner
After months of posting questionable ratings, the Better Business Bureau continues to have major problems with its business rating system.
This time, the BBB of Chicago and Northern Illinois gave its highest grade of A+ to Amcore Bank of Rockford and Peotone Bank and Trust Company of Peotone before both were closed by the FDIC on April 23, 2010. Both banks paid the Chicago BBB membership fees to receive the BBB's highest grade.
Taken from BBB Reliability Reports on 2/25/10
Failed Lincoln Park Saving Bank rated B- by the Chicago BBB, paid no fees and is not a member.
Taken from BBB Reliability Reports on 2/25/10
Since February 2010, the Better Ethics Bureau, an organization dedicated to the exposure of unethical practices at the BBB, has found 11 failing banks that were given passing grades by the BBB. Four were rated A+, four were A, and three were in the B's.
Rainier Pacific Bank in Tacoma, Washington was closed in December 2009. It stills carries an A+ rating with the BBB of Alaska, Oregon, and Western Washington.
The BEB researched a sample of current BBB reliability reports for this article. None of these reports warned the public the BBB was having inherent problems with its rating system.
Instead, the BBB puts in bold letters "Start with Trust" across the top of each reliability report, and a disclaimer in the fine print at the bottom of each report that information is "not guaranteed as to accuracy". Many find this technique misleading and deceptive.
In addition, the BBB also doesn't allow businesses it rates poorly to defend themselves on reliability reports. Nor does the BBB list the references used to develop ratings for a particular company.
As important, the BBB has not revealed what expertise, infrastructure, manpower, and management it has dedicated to a rating system that impacts millions of US businesses, all of them adversely, except for the few who pay to join the BBB to receive it highest grade of A+.
Because of questionable practices such as these and the BBB's growing history of unreliable ratings, many who have paid the BBB to get their A+ rating may not be aware their rating is worthless in the eyes of a more educated public.
The Chairman of the Board of Directors for the Chicago BBB, Roy E. Spencer, was contacted via email by the Better Ethics Bureau for his comments about these questionable ratings. This report may be updated, pending the outcome of this request.
The BEB asked him the following questions:
1. Will the BBB apologize to anyone who may have taken the BBB at its word to "Start With Trust" and used a BBB reliability report to do business with a failing bank the BBB rated A+?
2. What will the BBB do to make whole anyone who suffered a loss or significant inconvenience because he or she relied on the BBB's deceptive reliability reports and marketing practices which are documented in this report?
3. What will the BBB do to better inform the public of BBB weaknesses and faults in the future?
4. What will the BBB do to correct the obvious defects in its business rating system and reliability reports? When can your membership and the general public expect these changes to take place?
5. What will the BBB do to be transparent and accountable to its membership and the public with all its internal operations and finances as well as disclose all the complaints and lawsuits made against it?
It should be noted that Mr. Spencer is also the president of Perma-Seal Basement Systems, Inc.. This business is a member of the Chicago BBB and is rated A+. This is interesting because Perma-Seal has had 76 complaints in the last 36 months, 32 of these in the last 12 months*, showing once again that membership in the BBB may have its privileges. (*Based on 4/25/10 BBB Reliability Report. Current BBB Report for Perma-Seal).
BBB Complaint History for Perma-Seal Basement Systems on 4/25/10
To its credit, the BBB does publish really neat tips for consumers and repackage many stories about possible scams. And every now and then it does expose a possible scammer.
However, today, the BBB has yet to solve serious problems with its core operations of rating businesses and handling customer complaints. Making matters worse, the BBB has not been forthright about the many issues with its systems and its struggle to meet its commitments in a way that matches its hype.
These problems will continue as long as the BBB is not more transparent and accountable to its membership and to the public it claims to serve.
The BBB is rapidly losing the trust and confidence of the marketplace and deservedly so.
Editor's comment: The next time you hear a BBB CEO defend the BBB's rating system as time-tested and reliable, please feel free to refer to this article as well as others on this subject at this website, www.BBBRoundUp.com and www.BBB-Blog.com.
Related Story: FDIC Closes 7 IL Banks
Copyright 2010, by Scott Lee Jordan. Please reprint without charge--just let me know at Messages@BetterEthicsBureau.org.
Failed Bank Closed December 2009 Still Rated A+ by BBB
4/25/10
by Scott Jordan, freelance writer and business owner
The BBB of Alaska, Oregon and Western Washington gave the failing bank Rainier Pacific Bank (Tacoma, Washington) its highest rating of A+ before it was closed in December 2009 by the FDIC.
But this only part of this story.
Rainier Pacific Bank failed four months ago, yet, as of 4/25/10, the BBB still rates this bank as A+.
The case of Rainier Pacific Bank is further evidence the BBB does not have the expertise, infrastructure, or manpower to accurately rate 23 million US businesses and maintain the accuracy of those ratings.
Banks are central to most people lives and well-being. Here's the question a growing number of business people and consumers are asking themselves:
If the BBB can't get its ratings right when it comes to banks--and keep them right-- should the BBB be trusted at all?
Copyright 2010, by Scott Lee Jordan. Please reprint without charge--just let me know at Messages@BetterEthicsBureau.org.
McIntrye Law Firm PLLC Letter to CCCB:
A Winning Strategy for Lawsuits Against the BBB?
4/26/10
by Scott Lee Jordan, freelance writer and business owner
In September 2008, James T. McIntrye penned a letter to the Council of Better Business Bureaus (CBBB) on behalf of the Community Financial Services Association (CSFA), a national organization of payday loan stores. (McIntrye Law Firm, PLLC: Letter to CCCB, dated 9/29/2008)
At the time, the CBBB was apparently directing local chapters of the Better Business Bureau to deny membership to payday loan stores, even if a store had been a member in good standing with the BBB in the past.
Using the BBB's own statistics, Mr. McIntrye makes the case that the payday loan industry did not merit such treatment.
The first thing that is apparent is that the letter is CC'd to all CCCB board members. This indicates that a plaintiff suing the BBB and CCCB should include all members of the board of directors for both organizations. As mentioned in an earlier BEB report, board members have a responsiblity to ensure their organizations operate in a manner that is above reproach. They may be culpable for questionable practices if they don't.
Mr. McIntyre then outlines a possible civil lawsuit against the BBB, attacking the BBB's claim of qualified privilege. He writes:
Quote
Currently, as a matter of public policy, organizations such as the CBBB are generally granted a qualified privilege when disseminating reports about companies; however, this privilege may be revoked if there is evidence of ill will, malice, or abuse of the privilege. Thus, according to the Patio World case:
"Users of reports of mercantile agencies [organizations that collect and distribute information to clients concerning the standing of commercial firms,] usually have the utmost confidence in the accuracy of such reports and act accordingly . . .To be privileged, a mercantile agency's representatives must act impartially and in good faith, carefully evaluating all information before disseminating any defamatory statements to it subscribers. This requires them to make a thorough and complete investigation and to fully and accurately report information only from reliable sources. An erroneous or careless report serves no purpose except to substantially damage the subject of the report, and once the report is published, the damage has been done and very little can be done to correct it."
End Quote
The case cited is Patio World v. Better Business Bureau, Inc. 43 Ohio App. 3d 6; 538 N.E.2d 1098 (1989).
So, to sue the BBB and win, the plaintiff needs to defeat its qualified privilege and show where the BBB acted without impartiality, and/or erroneously, and/or carelessly.
I am no attorney, and I hope you attorneys out there, who want to see the BBB stopped, will chime in here.
Impartiality
Generally, to prove impartiality, the BBB would need to show that it does not favor members over non-members or consumers in any way shape or form. This impartiality would be hard for the BBB to prove for the following reasons:
1) Members provide the money on which the BBB exists. It would take an unprecedented set of checks and balances within the BBB to keep partiality from creeping into decisions involving dues-paying businesses.
2) The BBB favors member businesses in its rating system as a matter of record. This built-in bias likely pervades all the BBB does.
3) The BBB targets entire industries as unfavorable without doing the work to verify and recognize individual businesses in these groups that may be operating in a trustworthy fashion.
4) BBB Boards of Directors are often members of the same BBB they serve. They are often competitors of other rank-and-file members of the BBB and with non-member businesses throughout their communities. This conflict of interest is often fertile ground for impartiality issues.
5) The BBB would need to prove it does not favor members in its complaint handling systems, including penalties assessed to businesses that have complaints.
Erroneously and carelessly
To prove diligence in the prevention of erroneous and/or careless actions, the BBB would need to do the following.
1) The BBB must document the source of each fact published, and show how it was diligent in keeping information in reports current.
2) The BBB should show it provided the manpower, expertise, management and infrastructure consistent with its stated missions.
3) The BBB should show it routinely follows prudent and proven procedures, including the maintenance of audit trails that independent investigators can follow to verify BBB findings and reports.
For good reason, the Better Ethics Bureau and many others believe numerous errors and acts of carelessness abound at the BBB.
For example, as previously reported by the Better Ethics Bureau, the Chicago BBB has yet to explain how it completed the ratings for 102,000 businesses in a few months, after investigating, recording and evaluating 17 research-intensive factors for each business.
A staff of 147 personnel, excluding managers and supervisors, would need a full year to rate 102,000 businesses if an average of 3 hours was spent researching each business. The payroll cost for 147 fairly competent workers would be $5.6 million. Infrastructure for this staff and the perennial costs of reviewing each report and researching new ones should also be considered.
Editor's Note: And just how does the BBB research and pass judgment on all the advertising of a sizeable business, each and every time a business advertises? How was the advertising for all 102,000 Chicago businesses accumulated and evaluated before each company was given an initial score for its advertising?
Understanding that ratings in Chicago were not completed with this minimally prudent effort, exactly how did Chicago complete these ratings? Which of the 17 factors didn't receive the publicized attention? Who verified the ratings before they went public? Using what criteria?
Multiply the Chicago BBB by the 110 (or so) BBB's nationwide and you have the recipe for a boatload of errors and carelessness. As evidenced by the experiences of many on the short end of BBB reports, there is little doubt that flawed BBB operational philosophies continue to this day. The result is the BBB has needlessly damaged the reputations of hundreds of thousands of good business people as well have mislead countless consumers into believing they could "Start with Trust" with the BBB.
You may wonder if Mr. McIntyre's letter was effective. The BEB searched for accredited payday loan businesses at BBB.org and many were found. The CBBB did back off from putting payday loan businesses on its bad-boy list. Coincidence? Maybe, and maybe not.
If you have other merits or court cases that would further this discussion, please submit them to messages@BetterEthicsBureau.org. If they pass editorial muster, they will be posted to this website, the source appropriately cited.
Suing the BBB may still be an uphill battle, but hopefully these things will help anyone who chooses this course of action to seek justice and to force the BBB to be more ethical.
And thank you Mr. James T. McIntrye, McIntyre Law Firm, PLLC of Washington DC. I am sure your letter is a light in the darkness for many as it was for me.
Copyright 2010, by Scott Lee Jordan. Please reprint without charge--just let me know at Messages@BetterEthicsBureau.org.
Two More Failing Banks Get Passing Grades
5/4/10
by Scott Lee Jordan, freelance writer and business owner
The Better Business Bureau gave two more failing banks passing grades.
The BBB of Alaska, Oregon and Western Washington rated Frontier Bank (Everett, Washington) as B-. The BBB of Greater Kansas City rated B. C. National Bank (Butler, MO) as B+. Both banks were closed by the FDIC on April 30, 2010.
The Better Ethics Bureau has now documented where BBB's gave passing grades to at least 13 failing banks since December 2009.
The Better Ethics Bureau (BEB) conducted another survey of reliability reports on May 3, 2010 and found the BBB apparently still has not warned the public about this weakness in their rating system where users of its reports on businesses are most likely to see such warnings.
The BBB has not apparently corrected their rating system to make it more trustworthy or reliable for general public use.
Last week, the BEB asked via email the Chairman of the Board of Directors for the Chicago BBB, Roy E. Spencer, about his plans to address these issues after his BBB rated two failing banks A+ and a third B-. To date, the BEB has received no response from him or the BBB.
The Better Ethics Bureau once again warns the public that the BBB does not guarantee the information on it reliability reports is accurate.
The BBB research does not typically include actual analysis of a business's financial condition and insurance package, and the education and experience of key personnel. The BBB rarely conducts on-site visits to rate operational procedures, facility conditions, and equipment. As a result, the value and reliability of it business reports are in doubt.
Further, the BBB has not clarified for the public what research methods and sources it uses and the amount and degree of expertise of the staff it employs to rate businesses fairly and accurately.
The BBB also has not disclosed the infrastructure it has committed to reliability reports it publishes on millions of businesses.
Until the BBB is more transparent about its operations and finances, and as well address and correct many other questionable practices as detailed at www.BetterEthicsBureau.org, www.bbbRoundUp.com and other websites, the public is advised to disregard all BBB ratings. Businesses and trade associations are advised not to seek affiliation with the BBB.
Screen shots of BBB Reliability Reports taken on 5/1/10
Copyright 2010, by Scott Lee Jordan. Please reprint without charge--just let me know at Messages@BetterEthicsBureau.org.