Not very satisfied!

[oliver90owner]

This thread started with: found they had no stores at all - just empty comb where they had eaten all their stores.

And the OP finished with: Do I have any grounds to grumble? Or is this par for the course?

Either we have (all?) been duped by a (devious) someone with an axe to grind with the supplier, or it was a genuine occurrence, accurately described.

I go with the second option and that is now backed up with my limited dealings with that company.

I would gladly relate my experiences to any hearing of a legal kind, as I would expect others would do. Helen perhaps needed to have photographic evidence, but again that is easily contested as to it's origin.

The origin of the offending articles needed to be almost prised from her grasp, not readily spread over the net. I reckon any sane judge would realise the weight of evidence was very heavily in favour of Helen's version of events. I would most certainly readily support both Helen and Admin if the company involved thought it worthwhile to go to litigation.

RAB

 

[greatbritishhoney]

Any company taking libel action against an individual (or indeed an internet forum) would have to have very good grounds and a high liklihood of winning otherwise the resulting bad publicity would be more damaging than the alledgedly libellous post.
And, let's not forget, libel is only libel if it's not true. Reading back through all these posts I can't see any instances where someone has said something that is untrue. Of course, in a libel case it is the defendant that has to prove that the comments were true, but that would be easily done in this case.

Also, there was a ruling in 2009 that defamation on internet forums should be treated as slander rather than libel. So, very little point in taking someone to court for such little recompense.
There is also the defence of "fair comment". This means that someone can't sue you just because you say you don't like them or their products.

 

[johncorne]

When all of the wikileaks, super injunctions and libel issues spread on twitter (etc), remember that twitter were not taken to court - only forced to reveal the identies of its users! Admin is probably safe!

Jc

 

[rae]

Any company taking libel action against an individual (or indeed an internet forum) would have to have very good grounds and a high liklihood of winning otherwise the resulting bad publicity would be more damaging than the alledgedly libellous post.
And, let's not forget, libel is only libel if it's not true. Reading back through all these posts I can't see any instances where someone has said something that is untrue. Of course, in a libel case it is the defendant that has to prove that the comments were true, but that would be easily done in this case.

It would be interesting to prove whether these allegations are true. For all we know, the OP is someone with an axe to grind and the whole thing is made up - this is the internet, after all. Conversely, this could all be entirely truthful, we have no idea. I would imagine that there are reasonable grounds for action: no one is able to prove the veracity of the allegations (photos, examination of the unopened nuc by a third party), and yet the commentary is on line.

I'm willing to cut nuc suppliers a certain amount of slack. You're dealing with a live product, and you either renege on your delivery promises (leading to a load of comments about bad suppliers) or you do whatever you can to deliver. If these nucs had arrived a week or two later, they would have been looking far better - more bees, more brood. One of our nucs we got from the chap in Glos was similarly light - but went on to be a storming colony.

As to price - £180 seems outrageous, but so is £100 to fill up the car. Money isn't what it used to be.

 

[greatbritishhoney]

For all we know, the OP is someone with an axe to grind and the whole thing is made up - this is the internet, after all.

Possible, but unlikely.
Anyhow, all the OP has done is post a review of the supplier's product and customer service. Both of which would be covered by "fair comment" as far as the law goes.
For example, Apple couldn't sue me if I put a negative review on amazon saying the ipod I bought packed up after two weeks.

Don't forget the fact that the OP, at no point, has actually said exactly who the supplier is!

 

[rae]

For example, Apple couldn't sue me if I put a negative review on amazon saying the ipod I bought packed up after two weeks.

If it was untrue they could. The internet is no different to any other medium.

 

[psafloyd]

Of course, in a libel case it is the defendant that has to prove that the comments were true

And worth remembering.

 

[greatbritishhoney]

If it was untrue they could. The internet is no different to any other medium.

Yes, but they'd have to be pretty certain that it wasn't true before launching legal action. Otherwise it would be a very costly and embarrassing folly.

 

[oldtimer]

This is my first year with bees, and I started back in February by ordering (online) two nucs for the end of May/beginning June.

Then I realised what was available locally, and bought an overwintered nuc and then later a full hive, from two different, equally helpful people. Both are doing really well, in spite of some early mis-management of the nuc.

Last Friday we collected the expensive nucs I had ordered. On Saturday morning we transferred them to our hives, and found they had no stores at all - just empty comb where they had eaten all their stores.

I know bees are hungry at the moment (I am feeding both my AS hives and the small swarm we collected, and my original two are seadily eating everything in their supers) but I did expect that they would have been fed well enough to arrive with stores! Thank goodness we didn't leave them in the travel boxes for the full 24 hours we were advised!

My second reason for being a little unhappy is that my understanding of buying a nucleus was that I could expect a queen with the first of her own progeny - but I have a nuc where the queen had been introduced just a few days before.

Do I have any grounds to grumble? Or is this par for the course?
I have not yet done a full inspection - just transferred them quickly to the hives (and topped up the contact feeders everyday so far).

Any comments appreciated.

who did you buy it from was it weald farm bees by any chance ive got the same problem im waiting for a responce from them mine had no queen take pics of the nuc sent and write all comments down so u can tell them if you can get a beekeeper that kept bees ask yhem to give u a written report and let the vendor know asap

 

[HelenX]

who did you buy it from was it weald farm bees by any chance ive got the same problem im waiting for a responce from them mine had no queen take pics of the nuc sent and write all comments down so u can tell them if you can get a beekeeper that kept bees ask yhem to give u a written report and let the vendor know asap

No - not Weald Farm - if you read back through the thread it is clear! You are worse off than me if you have no queen - both my nucs have queens that are laying weel, and things are improving now - my complaint was mainly that they had been in the nuc boxes a while without being fed, and had no stores.

 

[davidstacey42]

I installed a nuc from FP last Saturday. I've only just come across this thread and probably wouldn't have made the purchase if I'd read it first. Having said that, the bees were as docile as you like and all seems well a week further on. Must admit I was surprised to get instructions that said 'release the queen' and to see the empty plastic queen container embedded in one of the frames. As a newcomer to beekeeping, I have to say that I'm surprised that (going by some people's experiences) the retail side of things can apparently be as dodgy as the second-hand car market. I think my conception of beekeepers as a breed started to go downhill when I read about thefts of hives; the presumption being that beekeepers are involved. I thought 'bad' beekeeping meant mis-managing the bees, not handling stolen ones!

David

 

[victor meldrew]

I installed a nuc from FP last Saturday. I've only just come across this thread and probably wouldn't have made the purchase if I'd read it first. Having said that, the bees were as docile as you like and all seems well a week further on. Must admit I was surprised to get instructions that said 'release the queen' and to see the empty plastic queen container embedded in one of the frames. As a newcomer to beekeeping, I have to say that I'm surprised that (going by some people's experiences) the retail side of things can apparently be as dodgy as the second-hand car market. I think my conception of beekeepers as a breed started to go downhill when I read about thefts of hives; the presumption being that beekeepers are involved. I thought 'bad' beekeeping meant mis-managing the bees, not handling stolen ones!

David

I don't understand from whence stems your dissatisfaction ?
You've no complaints about the bees in the nuc ?
The instructions to release the queen would apply to the queen being caged for travel security ?
If the cage was indeed empty ,it would appear that the bees had themselves released her by consuming the fondant plug usually used in these cases .
All seems well a week further on implies that you have a nuc with a laying Queen . Have you seen the Queen ? Do you have eggs and brood all stages? If so then where is your dissatisfaction ?
Should the nuc have been thrown together and the caged Queen insert from another colony, then you haven't been sold a BS nuc ! .

Beekeepers in general are an honest helpful bunch .
The recent surge of interest brought about by media hype has encouraged the less scrupulous among us to capitalise on the kind of prices being paid by newbies eager to obtain bees at any cost!
Buyer Beware equally applies in all walks of life

VM

 

[Chris B]

VM, I don't think David said he was dissatisfied. Just giving an appraisal of a nuc from FP. It's helpful to know that they are able to supply something reasonable.

 

[oliver90owner]

Chris B,



With the feeling that he felt he actually got away with it.

the fact that had heread the thread is clear evidence that FP ar likely to havetaken notice of and that other sales are likely to have been compromised.

RAB

 

[MartinL]

Name and shame

Surely we should only name and shame if the complaints are not satisfactorily dealt with?

If the nuc is clearly not as described!
Where did it come from, not good old Duck Lane?

Why should these dodgy spivs be given any chance to rectify their obvious attempt to rip someone off without any redress?

Name them now and then let everyone know what they do to put things right.

 

[oliver90owner]

MartinL,

Time to give it a rest, I think. You are 3 months behind the thread. Perhaps they have rectified their misdemeanors by now and so have already learned their lesson on sub-standard products.

 

[MartinL]

Yep 3 months behind!!!!


Having been ripped off three times on flea bay last week, couldn't resist the rant.


realised that too late.

 

[Skylark]

I've had the same problems as the original poster with a large company and actually got a response from guy who wrote the BBKA guidelines.
If you look on the BBKA forum under begginners question you'll see my thread New Hive No Queen. See link http://www.*************/members/forum.php?c=2&f=7&t=5403
if it works.
I feel very let down by this company.

 

[BBG]

Yep 3 months behind!!!!


Having been ripped off three times on flea bay last week, couldn't resist the rant.

For the record, how, what, where??

 

[MartinL]

For the record, how, what, where??

Sorry, fleabay ripoffs with only one bee related each item blatantly NOT as described!

I buy all my hive parts locally now. Know what I'm buying, good quality and no postage, I save money and the environment at the same time.
RESULT!