| Author | Subject: Previous post regarding Groom's Crickets |
| Marcia McGuiness - The Lizard Lady | Posted At 16:50:02 06/26/2001
Since my previous post #4599 on this forum, I have received a letter from Groom's Cricket Farm's attorney demanding that I cease and desist from making defamitory remarks against Mr. Groom and Groom's Cricket Farms. I have been accused of "defaming Mr. Groom's character and reputation with the intent to injure his business." I have been threatened with the "pursuit of legal remedies" because of my post. I have also spoken to Mr. Groom, and he has demanded that I have the previous post removed or he will proceed with filing a civil action against me. It was not my wish to defame Mr. Groom's business, and most certainly have not done anything with the intent of injuring his business. My goal was to discover if others have experienced similar tragedies in order to "rule out" the possibility of coincidence in the agonizing deaths of 12 of my Leopard Geckos. Since I am disabled with FMS, I do not have the stamina physically or emotionally to deal with such a lawsuit... I've been through enough trauma and devastation already. I have therefore requested that my previous post be deleted at the demand of Mr. Groom. Marcia McGuiness "The Lizard Lady" |
| JERRY TRESSER |
Re: Previous post regarding Groom's Crickets
4914.html Posted At 08:18:15 06/27/2001 MARCIA, I am also in the live food business as Grooms, whereas he sells crickets we sell fruitflies. Iam sorry that you were intimidated into providing the above post. It would be very difficult if not impossible for Grooms to establish a "loss of business" that related to your post. Considering that many of his customers are very satisfied with his products and service. Had we encountered a problem similar to the one you experienced, we would have tried to resolve the matter without bringing in an attorney. Under normal circumstances, your complaint would probably have fallen into oblivion over a period of time, and you would have gone on with your life and Grooms would continue to service the 1000s of customers he has and that would be that. However, intimidating a customer, is another matter. It appears that Grooms is looking to "set an example" for any future complaints! This disturbs me. I have been witness to an incident that occured many years ago, somewhat similar to your, and the negative publicity that occured because of it, forced the supplier to go out of business in the end. Every Herp society, and newsletter in the USA carried the fact that " some company was going to litigate a consumer " and the company lost out. It backedfired. People in general dont like a Goliath meets David approach, and you know what happened to Goliath. If Grooms persues this, kindly advise this forum, so that others can know. In todays world of providing information to the world, I dont think it would be prudent for Grooms to maintain this course of intimidation when a push of a button on the internet can cause more damage in showing how they deal with consumers than any threatning litigation on the part of Grooms. Insofar as the webmaster is concened, he is reporting information, and has no liability to deal with. |
| Nick Thomas |
This is appauling.....
4934.html Posted At 13:14:33 06/27/2001 I know Marcia would never try to "defame" anyone or their business. But if they do sue I'm sure it will hurt their business. I am sure at least half the people here know Marcia and if they did sue the consequences would be alot worse than if they just left this alone. I just want everyone to take some time and look at some of the rules here ----------If YOU have a problem with what someone is saying about YOU, then you need to state your case here and discuss it with the person making the offending statement. This forum is being provided in accordance with the freedom of speech and freedom of the press, guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States of America. As such, ANY effort made to discontinue this service will be construed as a violation of ALL viewers and posters of this forum's civil and constitutional rights. Rich, if these are your rules, kinda sounds like you could sue them. But what do I know....I mean, you can be sued now adays for hot coffee. Seems like you could be sued for improper grammer anymore. I am behind Marcia 100% on this, and I say if she wants it deleted, let her, if not, don't. All Marcia did was say she thinks this is the reason, she didn't even include their name in the subject. It was mysterious consequences. I guess this is why everyone hates big stores, most don't have the time to help the people and would rather throw rabid lawyers at you. If I don't get sued for this count me lucky. Just my OPINION, if anyone remembers what that is....Nick Thomas |
| Nick Thomas |
Re: Previous post regarding Groom's Crickets
4936.html Posted At 13:17:52 06/27/2001 meant she put the subject as mysterious coincidence? |
| Stephen Fisher |
Re: Previous post regarding Groom's Crickets
4937.html Posted At 13:54:05 06/27/2001 Please don't give up on this Marcia. I will be incontact with an Attorney Friend of Mine and give him a link to these posts. He will have a determination to me by the week end I hope. He helped me in the Geckolinks/Gexlinks controversy and is a very suave and crafty Attorney. Hang in there help is on the way!!! Stephen L. Fisher GEXLINKS.COM |
| Web Slave |
Re: Previous post regarding Groom's Crickets
4939.html Posted At 14:37:50 06/27/2001 Interesting point, Nick. There apparently could be considered an implied constitutional right in the First Amendment indicating that 'the people' have a right to recieve such information that someone may say or write. Otherwise a person could just be put into a box and they could say and write whatever they wanted, to no effect, and with no legal recourse. Apparently the Communications Decency Act of 1996 applied a few protections for people like myself running message boards and the like. The link, if anyone is interested, is: http://www.techtv.com/screensavers/answerstips/story/0,23008,3332414,00.html (Thanks Jeff B.) |
| Jay A. Martin |
Re: Previous post regarding Groom's Crickets
4940.html Posted At 14:39:46 06/27/2001 Marcia, All my best to your health! Mr. Groom, I had no idea about you or the original post. Now, thanks to the alleged lawsuit, I am quite familiar. When I hear Groom, I don't think of a wedding, I think of a poorly handled situation. In my opinion, you have done far more damage to yourself than could ever have been done by even a malicious post - none of which I have read. I urge you to close this matter professionally, and respectfully. Damage control should be your number one priority. It's still not too late. Sincerely, Jay A. Martin Breeder/Herper |
| david mcgowen |
Re: Previous post regarding Groom's Crickets
4963.html Posted At 22:03:46 06/27/2001 I have been trying different cricket suppliers lately. I have not yet tried Grooms but I had intended to use/try them next. In light of this controversy I will pass on Grooms. Not because I am worried about his crickets being toxic, for I think that if that was the case many more people would have seen problems. I will pass on Grooms because he elected to hire a lawyer. My feeling is that he will reap 10 times as much bad press for getting a lawyer to attack/threaten the Lizard Lady than if he had simply replied as he did then let it die out. |
| Ann Miles |
Re: Previous post regarding Groom's Crickets
4985.html Posted At 15:43:56 06/28/2001 I was not sure about posting here until I read the last response and then I felt that I had to. I too am trying out different cricket companies, getting the best quality for the best price. Not cheap crickets. I had ordered from Grooms before reading Marcia's story, 3,000 pins for my baby bearded dragons and 1,000 small mealworms. The order came on time, the mealworms were very healthy and ample amount, the crix however were partially dead. I immediately contacted Chris and he sent out another order and apologized for any inconvenience. The next order was demolished by the PO. The box looked as though a gorilla had played footbal with it. I contacted Chris again. He sent another order, no questions asked. He was courteous, always contacted me within several hours of my initial contact. He also beefed up the 3rd order, it was loaded with very lively happy crickets, until my baby beardies got ahold of them. I did not post this to make anyone unhappy, but I felt that someone had to mention the other side if there was one. In my opinion, there was one and there is one. Please do not let someone else's problem control what you do or why, particularly because there are millions of happy reptiles out there because of Grooms. I must admit when I first read Marcia's post last weekend, it scared me to death. I thought to myself, "Thank God those crix were partially dead maybe that saved my baby beardies." I read the next several posts and got real worried. I printed the entire exchange out and took it to my husband to read to get his opinion. When he finished he asked if i had read the entire thing. I had not. He thought I should. I felt so much better after finding out that there were happy customers that had used Groom's for many years. I think Marcia had a right to voice her fears and this forum is the place to do that, but I also do not blame Groom's for fighting some of what was said in that post. Maybe an edited form of that letter would be more appropriate and still get her main point across. You can't please everyone. I am aware that I am now "out there" for those who disagree with me and that is okay. Just please be civil and keep to the point. Thank you for your time. Ann McCabe Miles |
| Jay A. Martin |
Re: Previous post regarding Groom's Crickets
4986.html Posted At 16:11:38 06/28/2001 Ann, Firstly, I commend your courage for speaking on Groom's behalf. I saw nothing wrong with her original post. Nothing libelous anyway. My chief concern is the alleged lawsuit. If Mr. Groom had a problem with her comments, he should have at least tried speaking with Marcia first - the path of least resistance. He may or may not have problems with his feed, but I feel certain now, he has lost an opportunity to prove it to would-be customers. I still think there is time to "right wrongs". If Mr. Groom would come forward and make an attempt to solve this issue with genuine civility, he would earn a great deal of respect - mine included. Otherwise... I'm glad this board is here and I respect what it stands for. It has saved my hard-earned dollars even just recently - see post on Ricky Lockett. My .02cents - again. Jay A. Martin |
| Chad Jacobs |
Re: Previous post regarding Groom's Crickets
4989.html Posted At 18:47:58 06/28/2001 Everyone's talking about freedom of speach here , well you can't go into a plane and yell bomb you can't go into the mall and yell fire and to me that's what the first post sounded like ,if she had said that she tested the crickets and found a toxin that would be one thing but she didn't,so what that amounts to is slander because there is no proof that the deaths are related to the crickets.I've been using grooms since they started because the biggest monitor breeder in the usa sent me to them and i will keep using them no matter how many people they sue.The plain and simple fact is that every shipment i've gotten from them has been great and none of my animals have ever had a problem . that's what matters to me..... |
| chad jacobs |
Re: Previous post regarding Groom's Crickets
4990.html Posted At 18:49:22 06/28/2001 forgot my e-mail |
| Steve Barry |
Re: Previous post regarding Groom's Crickets
4992.html Posted At 20:29:27 06/28/2001 Jerry I agree with you 100%. After reading the original post and replies I was straddling the fence, right up until the last sentence where the you'll be hearing from my attorney remark was made. They definitely could have handled it better as it didn't seem like Marcia was looking for anything. Chad I agree with you also about your plane and mall statements. You are one of the many hundreds or thousands of people who are satisfied with Grooms supplies and service. There are many large and reputable companies out there, that over the years have product recalls for one reason or another. I believe tylenol was recalled due to tampering, Firestone defective tires, there was a big beef recall recently but I don't remember the company and if my memory serves me correctly Gerber foods had some products pulled from the shelf. While Grooms may have impecable standards at their breeding facility, no one is infailable. I just think they called in the cavalry a little too early. Just out of curiosity I checked my local yellow pages. It's 1095 pages long. 62 pages of lawyers, a whopping 5.6%. On the other hand dentists scored 25 pages, less than half that of the lawyers. I think in some parts of the city her your lawyers business card is a valid second piece of i.d. Good luck Marcia. |
| Chris Grooms - Grooms Cricket Farm |
Re: Previous post regarding Groom's Crickets
5014.html Posted At 12:44:41 06/29/2001 I am Chris Grooms with Grooms Cricket Farm and this letter is in response to the many posts about our business and the unfortunate situation regarding Ms. Marcia McGuiness. I believe it may help the situation if I do a recap of my perceptions of the events, and explain my reactions to them. Please take time to read through this post and see the situation through my eyes. I was not even aware of Ms. McGuiness' problem until I received e-mails from customers and friends to check it out her message on this message board. Upon reading the post, of course I became very upset and took offense at it, which I think many of you would have done, being in my shoes. Possibly the shock and surprise element can best explain how I might have reacted in ways that were not appropriate. Hindsight is always 20-20. We pride ourselves with a good reputation for providing excellent service to our customers, and will do whatever is needed to resolve a problem. Prior to reading that message, I had never had any contact from Ms. McGuiness indicating that there was a problem, and I sincerely felt that if she really believed our crickets caused her leopard geckos harm, she should have called me personally and let me try to help out. Considering our reputation for handling customers with concerns, I would have made this one our top priority. It is because of this lack of contact from Ms. McGuiness, that I felt that we were unjustly accused of being the source of her geckos tragic illnesses and deaths. Although the information in her message sounded all well documented and well researched, and the tone of the message was not so much an accusation as a request for information, it still implied that my business was the cause of the problems. But I have to admit that the comment in Ms. McGuiness's message mentioning the success she was having with her new cricket provider, which she named, that particularly led me to believe she was attempting to target our business for harm. There really was no need, at that time to even mention names, as it had no bearing in the intent of her message. After reading her message, I tried to call Ms. McGuiness without success for a couple of days. I believe my timing in calling just didn't match her timing, as I was not able to reach her. It was only after these failed attempts to reach her by phone, that I felt it necessary to contact my attorney about writing her a letter concerning her message. I REALIZE NOW, THAT WAS NOT THE BEST THING I COULD HAVE DONE OR SHOULD HAVE DONE. And I will admit that my attorney, as attorneys can do sometimes, may have come on a bit too strongly in that letter. After receiving the letter from my attorney, Ms McGuiness sent me an e-mail in an effort to explain the post. Afterwards I attempted to call her again and this time was able to reach her. She was very pleasant to me on the phone and explained to me that what I perceived to be her intentions was not correct. Her intentions were simply to figure out why her leos were dying, and not to direct harm at my company. I explained to her that I was disappointed she did not call and try to work things out with me before taking her problem public, and that I really believed until that point she was trying to do my company harm, not figure out the problem with her leos. Again, I realize now the true intent of Ms. McGuiness' goal was the welfare of her animals, and not to damage my company's reputation. I am willing to say that I over-reacted and regret my action(s). But they all felt appropriate at the time. The last thing I wanted was to cause any more physical or emotional harm to Ms. McGuiness than she had already experienced. There will not be any further legal action taken on my part about this matter, and I hope we can bring this chapter to a close together. I feel very strongly that Grooms Cricket Farm has an excellent reputation for providing healthy crickets and great customer service and I do not want something like this to ruin our reputation or our customer relationships now and in the future. When we started this business, our goal was to give the best customer service possible, treat the small customer just as well as our larger customers, and just simply to be true to our word. So far we have succeeded, and we want to continue our track record. I do not believe it is necessary to have our crickets tested, simply because we have not had any complaints from anyone else about a problem such as Ms. McGuiness suffered. However, we also do not oppose it. If anyone would like our crickets tested, please call me or e-mail with the lab address of your choice and I will gladly submit a box for testing. In closing, I wish to restate that I do not believe our crickets caused Ms. McGuiness' leos illness or death. If they were the cause, I certainly expect I would have heard this from other customers, which we have not. I will admit, however, that I could have handled this situation much better. But I am human like everyone else out there, and can feel pain at being targeted in public, anger in being unjustly accused, frustration in having no way to resolve the problem, and humility and embarrassment when I realize I made a mistake in my reactions. However, I have learned something through this all that will hopefully make me a much wiser businessman. If nothing else positive comes out of this, I would at least hope that the point that has been made is for anyone having a problem to PLEASE let a company know about it before taking it public. We will bend over backwards to either solve the problem, or help you figure out the solution, but we have to know about it before we can do a thing about it. If anyone of you would put yourself into my shoes, you will probably find that my reactions were exactly how you would have reacted in my place. I only ask that you consider this before thinking bad of me, or my company. Thank you, Chris Grooms |
| Brian Oakley |
Re: Previous post regarding Groom's Crickets
5018.html Posted At 13:13:54 06/29/2001 I have kept track of this WHOLE matter on the three different threads going on. Like I said in the past I do not know either of the parties, but I AM a frequent buyer of crickets for my dragons. That is what kept my interest more than anything. If ever I needed crickets and Groom's was the only company left, what would I do? Again, I think the situation is VERY unfortunate for BOTH parties. There are NO winners. I have not taken sides in this matter since I was not there for any of it personally, but in closing my hat is off to Chris Grooms. Without any reason to believe his words were not sincere, I think it would be very hard to write and say what he just did. Admitting wrong doing is sometimes the toughest thing for a human to do. He sees the other side of the story and feels for her as well. This does not answer any questions nor does it get Ms. McGuiness' leos back, but I think she will agree that it does show a true man. Not that my opinion matters Chris, but you did what I think should have been done. Compliments to you and my deepest appologizes to you Ms. McGuiness for your troubles. Respectfully, Brian Oakley |
| Brian Conley |
Re: Previous post regarding Groom's Crickets
5019.html Posted At 14:30:29 06/29/2001 Hat's off to Groom's. That's the way to handle it!!! |
| Marcia McGuiness - The Lizard Lady |
Re: Previous post regarding Groom's Crickets
5054.html Posted At 12:43:26 07/01/2001 I believe it takes incredible humility and integrity for Mr. Grooms to have made this post, and I appreciate and respect his perspective. I have NEVER made ANY negative statement or opinion regarding Groom's Cricket Farms service or products, and I sincerely regret that this tragedy has escalated to the point it has. Thank you Mr. Grooms for making this statement. I feel confident that this ordeal can be resolved with mutual respect and compassion for the other's point of view. As I have already stated, please be assured that I did indeed speak to someone at Groom's when this situation came to light... it was just the wrong person I talked to! It was my intent to gather as much factual information BEFORE I made any accusations or allegations against Groom's business. Yes, I may have implied that Groom's crickets were the culprits, and perhaps I have also over-reacted, but keep in mind that I have never experienced the trauma of the horrible and needless deaths of 12 of my beloved Leopard Geckos, nor have I experienced being threatened with a lawsuit, either. As Mr. Gooms stated, we are ALL only human, and it is human nature to protect that which we love. I wanted to protect my geckos, and he wanted to protect his business. I would also like to acknowledge and offer my most sincere thanks to Rich Z for his committment and involvement in this "sticky dilemma", as I can hardly imagine the level of energy and emotions he has extended with this situation. I am deeply grateful to him for providing this forum, and for using the democratic process of putting the question to the forum users to help him determine the final outcome of this issue. I am overwhelmed by the unsolicited support by those of you who have responded with your opinions on this matter. Please accept my heartfelt appreciation for your encouragement and generosity in offering your financial assistance in the event this issue required me to seek legal counsel. I am indeed very fortunate to have such a remarkable network of friends. Sincerely, Marcia McGuiness "The Lizard Lady" |
| Jay A. Martin |
Re: Previous post regarding Groom's Crickets
5064.html Posted At 15:11:44 07/01/2001 My hat's off to Mr. Groom and Ms. McGuiness!! My hat's also off to our host - Webslave. I think this little saga has taught us all something very important. It has also shown just how valuable this board can be. I for one will continue to frequent this board. Kudos to all! Jay A. Martin |
| Bill Horn, Briarpatch Herps |
Re: Previous post regarding Groom's Crickets
5068.html Posted At 16:27:18 07/01/2001 i respect and admire Chris Grooms new method of handling this problem and commend him for admitting his mistakes in the handling of it previously. i agreed with him all the way up to "I do not believe it is necessary to have our crickets tested, simply because we have not had any complaints from anyone else about a problem such as Ms. McGuiness suffered. However, we also do not oppose it. If anyone would like our crickets tested, please call me or e-mail with the lab address of your choice and I will gladly submit a box for testing." reason being there are MANY animals using these crickets as a main food source and future problems could be avoided by jumping into a plant investigation at Grooms. i realize some costs would add up with labwork but then again it would make the company money AND earn customers in the end by going that extra mile that "assures quality and customer satisfaction" just a suggestion of course, but something to seriously consider. good luck to all. Bill Horn Briarpatch Herps |