|
Has anyone realised you don't actually need to own the make or model to submit an owners review? You can just take a road test of a make you don't like then put in a rubbish review. HJ, is this an exception to prove the rule? Well I objected twice as that seems offensive to me, and it's still there. 95% of genuine owners disagree with the 'tester', including HJ.
|
|
It's the internet. I take anything I read by someone who is making unchecked reviews as BS. It often is.
|
|
|
Has anyone realised you don't actually need to own the make or model to submit an owners review? You can just take a road test of a make you don't like then put in a rubbish review. HJ, is this an exception to prove the rule? Well I objected twice as that seems offensive to me, and it's still there. 95% of genuine owners disagree with the 'tester', including HJ.
Honest John doesn't own all the cars he reviews either...
If you don't like the review then just ignore it - and just becuase someone did not like the car doesn't make them wrong in their opinions of it either.
|
|
It is not the content or opinion of the review which is at issue, it is the validity of it. HJ don't publish reviews under the title of 'owner'. There is an implied promise to the reader in the title that the review will be one from someone who has a more long term experience of the car, not just taken it round the block. And as well as that is not prejudiced against the brand because he owns it. The review criticizes the performance and fuel consumption-30mpg, not normal. And it's 90 bhp. If an owner, would have known there was clearly a fault with that particular car's engine. Owners reviews should be for owners, whatever the make.
|
|
Even if it were necessary (which I don't personally think it is), how do you suggest we stop someone putting up a review of a car they don't actually own?
|
|
I'm inclined to agree with the OP on this issue. You can't stop someone putting up such a review, Avant, but is there any reason why you can't remove it and send a polite email indicating why you've done so. I presume the review could be posted as a topic instead.
|
|
I am sorry to be rude but I am incredulous.
Does the OP suggest he /she believes anything they read on he internet?
Maybe he/she also believes in the promises of politicians ?
(If you want an example of lying politicians see the Greeks who voted - dumbly in my opinion - for a Government which promised them no more hardship and blue skies when they are bust.. Unsusrprisingly the politicians lied. It was clear they were. Tough = any thinking person could see it would not work.)
I believe what people write on the internet as much as I believe that the moon is made of blue cheese and money grows on trees. (People in the UK vote for politicians who promise to make them poorer-- see UKIP and teh Greens.)
|
|
I agree entirely, Ma***. I can't believe a word I said in my previous post.
:-)
Edited by John Boy on 21/02/2015 at 19:51
|
|
|
|
People are missing the point. It is not about the content.
Edited by itsagas on 26/02/2015 at 10:13
|
|
|
|
|
|
".... is there any reason why you can't remove it and send a polite email indicating why you've done so?"
Because (a) the review section isn't my responsibility as forum moderator, (b) I'm sure that no-one in the HJ team has the time to trawl through hundreds of car reviews in case one of them might not be from an owner. and (c) it may well not be clear whether someone is an owner or not. Where would you draw the line?
Madf has it right - be sceptical of anything you read on the internet. But in general the review section performs a useful service and most people find the reviews helpful.
|
|
Living as I do out in the countryside,where the nearest decent shop is about 20 mls. away,I tend to buy a lot of goods by mail from a well known Ammerican owned website. Up to a few months ago I was pestered for a review of everything bought. Then I wrote a very critical,but honest review of something I`d bought.Result? No more nagging for reviews. Says it all. The only reviews I take seriously are the ones with hundreds of contributors.
|
|
I'm very sceptical about all reviews - they either exaggerate any faults with no balance to any good points or they're so gushingly good because it's human nature not to believe you've ever made the wrong choice.
When I've found a product or place that I thought was very good, I've tried to write a review but inevitably discard it because I can't omit any points less than perfect meaning the end result makes it look like I thoroughly dislike it - so I never actually post them.
|
|
I ONLY read the critical reviews. Some are obviously rubbish ( I gave this product 1 star bcause I ordered it in PINK but it's the wrong colour of pink... or some such infantile rubbish).
No negative reviews or few is a good sign.
|
|
Piggy said "... Up to a few months ago I was pestered for a review of everything bought. Then I wrote a very critical,but honest review of something I`d bought. Result? No more nagging for reviews. Says it all."
I'd be curious to know if that was the first review you'd written, Piggy. If it was, you could put a different interpretation on the subsequent lack of nagging i.e. they know they've now alerted you to the facility, so there's no need to mention it again.
|
|
|
|
|
a)the reviewer admits to be not an owner.
b)it has been reported as not valid.
c)if too busy to control the site, then the title should be 'readers reviews'
d)on your advice, I won't believe anything HJ say.
|
a)the reviewer admits to be not an owner.
b)it has been reported as not valid.
c)if too busy to control the site, then the title should be 'readers reviews'
d)on your advice, I won't believe anything HJ say.
I suppose you think the JD Power Survey is accurate fact rather than subjective opinions with no restriction on who responds.
|
|
"You can fool some of the people all of the time" and "there is one born every moment" are not idle comments but a testament to human gullibility.
See also Jack Straw and Malcom Rifkind as another testament to it.
|
"You can fool some of the people all of the time" and "there is one born every moment" are not idle comments but a testament to human gullibility.
I must admit that I have read the HJ reviews when looking for new(ish) cars, but decisions are made after trying myself.
The latest was after trying with friends , some of them having also bought the car and were happy/
Edited by oldroverboy. on 26/02/2015 at 16:35
|
|
|
|
In response to madf, being rude is contrary to forum policy, especially when you haven't even understood the issue.
Thanks to you this thread has gone down a pointless line about not believing everything you read when it could have been an interesting discussion on which reviews are helpful and which are not. I'll explain it to you again by way of an analogy. If a sperm swims up your fallopian tube, meets the ovary, the ovary says yes you are a valid sperm you can come in and my eggs will read your chromosomes. If something else arrives the ovary says no you are not valid, we don't care if your chromosomes are are right or wrong, you cannot come in. The roadtesters review is not valid and should not be allowed in.
Yes OF COURSE we can discount what we read, we all know that.
Actually Avant's answer (along with JohnBoy) is interesting because it accepts the principle thank you, but it's a pity they can't remove it, being only one little job.
Then I came across this, the Raison d'Etre of owners reviews, HJ from May 2010: "We've now got a facility for Owners' Reviews up and running. So you can add what you think and your experiences of your own car to the Car by Car Reviews."
You see-your OWN car, your OWN car. Genuine owners reviews are very useful indeed. We can take our own roadtests.
|
|
I think madf's point about nothing on the internet being verifyable is relevant and important - and since around 75% of all new cars aren't OWNED by their user, it makes ownership an unreasonable requirement - well over 50% of new cars are company owned and an increasing number of new car private "buyers" use HP or PCP where they don't own it either.
|
I have a company car, I don't own it. However, I've driven it for nigh on 120,000 miles in the past 3.5 years. I do many hours a week at its wheel. It is also used as our family car. It has travelled the length and breadth of the UK and Ireland countless times and has carried me to and from Italy, Germany France and Spain on numerous occasions. I rely on it absolutely to do my job. But I don't own it.
Am I not entitled to have a valid opinion of it strengths and weaknesses or do I need to buy it first?
Just curious really.
|
|
Absolutely, RT and Alby. If 'owners' meant only those with legal title, it would indeed knock out the great majority of drivers of new cars.
Clearly what is intended is reviews of cars by their regular drivers, whether the car is owned by their employer, a finance company or their mum or dad. I don't think many people would post an 'owner's review' after taking a test drive, but it really isn't the end of the world if they do, and nothing is gained by removing it.
This thread is a bit like an electric handbrake - providing answers to a question which doesn't need to be asked.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I test drove a Logan 1.5 diesel
It drove like an old Renault van
not for im afraid no matter how cheap it was
|
|
|
