Non-Disparage Clause in P-n-S

Fill Ess

Well-Known Member
Oct 16, 2020
2,239
NA
Boat Info
TBD
Engines
Plenty
I'm in the process of signing a P&S on a new to me boat. It has a clause that says -- paraphrasing:

Buyer will not make disparaging comments about [ dealer ], the seller, any of their executives, shareholders etc .... no limitation .... in print media, social media, direct mail etc

I pulled up an older P&S from a few years ago, same dealer, and this was not there.

Just wondering how common this is and if you've seen it before?
 
I have seen that before in other contracts. Ask to strike it out along with the other items you don’t like.
 
I dislike Brokers.......Buying a boat should not be that hard.
 
That just makes you think how many times that has happened that makes them need to put that in the contract. I would think it would be very bad for business by having that in there. It may not even be legal for them to have that.
 
Doesn't necessarily make me think they have a history of bad things automatically.

One scenario:
The company went to their attorneys and asked them to update their agreements. The attorneys largely filled in with boilerplate that they had. This may or may not have originated from the entity that the contract is from.
 
Does this mean also not reporting potential malfeasance to BBB?
There is the possibility that a deficiency was intentionally hid or worse yet hid by collusion that you find later.
With that said there is a difference in "disparaging comment" and articulating issues.
 
Ok thanks, I was thinking along the same lines -- CYA in case they get slammed in social media.

I'm not one to drag this particular dealer's name through the mud if the deal went bad, although I might mention it here and leave out the specifics.

When I bought my current boat, there were some paperwork issues from a vendor they hired/used but it was not the dealer themselves.
 
Make sure that it's mutual or bidirectional. If it's not I would require it be removed.
If they're not willing to live by the same standard to not disparage the buyer, somethings not right.
 
In a contract "disparage" means to make a false and injurious statement. So the contract specifies you should not lie about the transaction in a way the hurts the reputation of the seller and those who participated in the deal. Anyone have an issue with that?
 
I would cross out "disparaging" and insert the word "false" instead. That's entirely fair, so if they have a problem with that, we'd have to have a discussion.
 
In a contract "disparage" means to make a false and injurious statement. So the contract specifies you should not lie about the transaction in a way the hurts the reputation of the seller and those who participated in the deal. Anyone have an issue with that?

Well, you got the definition right, but anyone could get that from Google (no disparagement intended). Having such a clause in a retail contract is likely 1. an overzealous attorney, 2. a party with a guilty conscious (or actual bad faith dealings) or, 3. boilerplate language from other dissimilar agreements, that is atypical of such an agreement. In any event, while such language would rarely come into play, especially in an arms length transaction that goes well, including this language leads you down a slippery slope. Do you really want to get into arguing a false and injurious statement vs. a factual and injurious statement. Lots of grey area that attorneys would love to argue. Better to strike it and let them try and argue why they need it. That should be telling.
 
My guess it's an industry contract with new boilerplate language given all the internet posting these days. It leaves the customer open to a lot a issues should they complain online. Not something I would willingly want to agree to, but might be hard to get rid of. I'd try crossing it out and see what happens.
 
My guess it's an industry contract with new boilerplate language given all the internet posting these days. It leaves the customer open to a lot a issues should they complain online. Not something I would willingly want to agree to, but might be hard to get rid of. I'd try crossing it out and see what happens.
And, in the last couple of years here in our beloved CSR multiple entries have probably crossed the line on disparaging comment. So, we are in the social climate these days where corporations need to protect themselves from WOKE Karens wielding their emotions that they've been done wrong, true or not. Chicken / Egg which to fix??
 
You’re buying ANOTHER boat? More details needed. Another dinghy?

I'm not sure if I should say? Or leave in suspense :D

This is a new big boat -- a replacement. The dinghy is here to stay! Until I break it :eek:
 
I'm actually down-sizing quite a bit. For a while I was looking at moving up about 5 feet to a sedan bridge, but our boating days have changed. This is quite a reduction.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
112,946
Messages
1,422,756
Members
60,929
Latest member
Henchman
Back
Top