Quote:
|
Originally Posted by uno
Exactly. It was a very well worded post that did not imply nor say directly anything of the sort. If people want to make assumptions, that is not the fault of NATS and TMM. All it simply stated was that there was a discrepancy that they were trying to clarify and they were met with abusive language and hung up on.
|
It doesn't quite work like that. It can be argued that they implied shaving. It can also be argued that they posted it to be inflammatory and to damage. If there's an argument, then the jury will decide and much money will be spent all around.
FWIW it was a terribly worded post, in that it was posted at all. A private agreement which was very likely about to be litigated discussed in public, WTF! Anyone doing business with either of these parties should look long and hard at what they think acceptable conduct is.