![\"Clueless](\"https:\/\/www.urban75.org\/blog\/images\/citylink.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
When a big company screws up and\u00a0attracts\u00a0negative\u00a0criticism, the smart thing to do is to reach out to their customers,\u00a0apologise\u00a0and offer to make things right.<\/p>\n
But that’s not how Citylink – recently described as the “most embarrassingly unprofessional company imaginable” \u00a0– like to do things.<\/p>\n
Instead, they like to try and bully negative comments off the web by\u00a0way of dubious legal threats and bizarre claims.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Three year old moan<\/strong><\/p>\n Some time ago, I ran a piece venting about the\u00a0astonishingly\u00a0dire service<\/a>\u00a0I received from Citylink, who remain the worst couriers I have\u00a0ever<\/em>\u00a0had the misfortune to use.<\/p>\n The piece, written way back in 2008, documented my unhappy dealings with the company, and proved rather\u00a0popular\u00a0with readers,\u00a0notching up thousands of page views. A companion thread<\/a> on\u00a0the busy urban75 forums also found no shortage of equally disgruntled Citylink\u00a0customers.<\/p>\n Although Citylink managed to piss me off again with more\u00a0stunning\u00a0incompetence<\/a> in June 2011, I’d pretty much forgotten about the original article until I received this threatening email yesterday, entitled:<\/p>\n INTENT OF NOTICE FOR LEGAL PROCEEDINGS – DO NOT IGNORE THIS EMAIL <\/strong><\/p>\n It seemed that Citylink had suddenly decided to object to the small (425 pixels wide) image I’d used to illustrate my blog article, which was a press photo of one of their vans with the logo altered to read “Shittylink.”<\/p>\n A little childish, I grant you, but it\u00a0certainly\u00a0reflected my anger with the company.<\/p>\n I’ve stolen the ENTIRE WEBSITE!<\/strong><\/p>\n Because a tiny logo could still be spotted in the image, Citylink insisted that it represented an, “infringement of our registered and common law rights,” but then went\u00a0deep into the realms of\u00a0fantasy:<\/p>\n It has come to our attention that you have published material containing I’m not sure how using this one small image added up to ‘copying an entire website’, but Citylink went on to demand that I:<\/p>\n 1. cease all use of the trademark Flying C logo and entire website encompassing our intellectual property;<\/p>\n 2. deliver-up for destruction all material to which the Flying C 3. undertake, in writing, never in future to make any use of the Flying 4. compensate us for our legal costs incurred in this matter which Hounding bloggers<\/strong><\/p>\n Now, some of you may think that Citylink’s time would be spent more wisely apologising to their irate customers and trying to improve their lamentable reputation, but it seems that threatening bloggers over \u00a0three-year old posts is more their style.<\/p>\n Even\u00a0though\u00a0there is a very strong case that my use of their press image\u00a0represented\u00a0‘fair use,’ \u00a0I immediately\u00a0removed\u00a0it and replaced it with my own picture of a\u00a0similar\u00a0delivery vehicle, this time replacing the ‘Flying C’ logo with a rather splendid flying cock (see above for a more artistic take on it).<\/p>\n My reply<\/strong><\/p>\n Keen not to suffer their randomly totted-up ‘compensation\u00a0costs’, I took legal advice before swiftly sending them a considered response to their threats:<\/p>\n Hi Tim<\/p>\n Thank you for your message.<\/p>\n Although your claim of the “Widespread use of the Flying ‘C’ trade mark” This did leave me with the problem of having to find a new Please be sure to contact me at your earliest convenience if you I am rather intrigued by your bizarre claim that I was “copying your I’m also mystified as to how I’m supposed to “deliver up the image for However, if you’d like to mail me the original photo file on a hard Finally, I’m happy to pledge to never to use any Citylink images In fact, I can feel a new article coming on now. Oh, yes.<\/p>\n Regards PS Have you ever heard of a phenomenon known as the ‘Streisand Effect’?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n The Barbara Streisand backfire<\/strong><\/p>\n The Streisand Effect happens when a wealthy company or\u00a0individual tries to use legal means to hide or remove a piece of online information that they don’t like – but in doing so, they only end up\u00a0publicising the information more widely.<\/p>\n It is named after the American entertainer Barbra Streisand, whose doomed attempts to\u00a0suppress photographs of her residence in 2003 had the exact reverse effect [Streisand effect<\/a>].<\/p>\n With luck, I’m hoping that this is exactly what Citylink will now suffer,\u00a0because\u00a0after\u00a0Ol’ Timmy’s attempts to\u00a0bully\u00a0me with his\u00a0nutjob claims about ‘copying their entire website,’ I’m going to express my\u00a0dissatisfaction\u00a0with his company TWICE AS LOUDLY AS\u00a0BEFORE.<\/p>\n Citylink: universally derided as being crap<\/strong><\/p>\n It’s not just me who had had a\u00a0nightmare\u00a0experience with Citylink – just look what their online users say.<\/p>\n The Review Centre has received no less than 1,299 reviews<\/a> of City Link’s delivery service and they’re almost all bad, with \u00a0the most recent reviews commenting:<\/p>\n “Pathetic so-called service” Yes, they really are terrible<\/strong><\/p>\n <\/strong>Another reviews site, TrustPilot contains over 570 reviews<\/a>, and once again, they’re\u00a0overwhelmingly\u00a0negative, with Citylink only managing a lamentable overall score of 1.9\/10 for service.<\/p>\n The most recent reviews on the front page come with the damning titles: “Disgusting service,” “Appallingly bad service,” “4 attempted deliveries and none of them to the right address – still waiting,” and “Shockingly unprofessional ‘company’.”<\/p>\n The popular dooyoo site also has a lengthy discussion thread about Citylink’s service<\/a> and – as you may have guessed – it’s full of user complaints and people deeply dissatisfied with their service.<\/p>\n Avoid the feckers<\/strong><\/p>\n As for me, I’ll never use Citylink again if I can help it, and I will always\u00a0explain\u00a0to online vendors why I don’t want them to send their goods with the company.<\/p>\n I’m also hoping that by sharing this, others will get a good idea of what they can expect with Citylink and make a more informed choice when choosing a courier for an\u00a0important\u00a0delivery.<\/p>\n Company background:<\/strong><\/p>\n Citylink, now owned by\u00a0Rentokil Initial<\/a>,\u00a0 reported revenues of\u00a0\u00a3335.5 million last year<\/a>\u00a0and were happy to sign a three year deal with\u00a0Colonel Gaddafi in 2009<\/a>. Nice.<\/p>\n
\nthe Flying C trademark and the intellectual property namely copying our<\/strong>
\n entire website<\/strong> ON\u00a0https:\/\/www.urban75.org\/blog\/citylink-couriers-useless-lying-wankers\/<\/a>.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\ntrademark and entire website encompassing our intellectual property, or any
\nother mark and entire website encompassing our intellectual property
\nconfusingly\u00a0or deceptively similar to our client’s trademark has been applied;<\/p>\n
\nC trademark and entire website encompassing our intellectual property without
\nprior written authority from us, whether within any corporate name, trading
\nname, trading style, domain name or otherwise;<\/p>\n
\namount to \u00a3500 upon failure of complying with this notice.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n![\"Clueless](\"https:\/\/www.urban75.org\/blog\/images\/citylink-02.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
\nis clearly a wild exaggeration (there was only one small illustration
\nwith the logo just 140 pixels across), I’m sure you’ll be pleased to
\nlearn that the image of one of your legendarily speedy vehicles has
\nbeen immediately removed, as requested.<\/p>\n
\nillustration for the article about your company’s dreadful service, so
\nI’m sure you’ll be delighted with the new image showing a battered
\nyellow transit van, circa 1982, with a big flying cock on the side.<\/p>\n
\nbelieve this new – and, frankly, rather improved – image breaches your
\ncopyright in any imaginable way.<\/p>\n
\nentire website.” Unless your entire website comprises of a single
\nimage you have become as confused as one of your legendarily wayward
\ndrivers.<\/p>\n
\ndestruction”. The disputed image was your own press photo with an
\namusing caption added, so I don’t own it, and you certainly have no
\nclaim to my text.<\/p>\n
\ndrive, I’d be happy to smash it into a thousand pieces on your behalf.<\/p>\n
\nagain, although, sadly, it’s highly unlikely that I won’t feel
\ncompelled to write about your incompetent service again in the future.<\/p>\n
\nMike (urban75.com<\/a>)<\/p>\n![\"Clueless](\"https:\/\/www.urban75.org\/blog\/images\/citylink-01.jpg\")
<\/p>\n![\"Clueless](\"https:\/\/www.urban75.org\/blog\/images\/citylink-03.jpg\")
<\/a><\/p>\n
\n“Worst Delivery\u00a0Company\u00a0Imaginable”
\n“Most embarrassingly unprofessional company imaginable.”
\n“Late delivery and useless drivers and customer service”
\n“Making Peoples Lives A Misery – A nightmare experience”
\n“AVOID AVOID AVOID! (If you want your parcel delivered!)”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n![\"Clueless](\"https:\/\/www.urban75.org\/blog\/images\/citylink-04.jpg\")
<\/a><\/p>\n