As I see it, this case is highlighting the difference between merely 'having a grumble' and making unsubstantiated accusations of illegal behaviour.
No issue with having a grumble in a review - as long as you keep it honest and factual. Other clients of theirs have managed this and the company have responded with their side of the story with (seemingly) no further issues.
People keep trying to paint this as 'being sued for a bad review' but that's very misleading, it was a very specific comment within that review that has caused the problem.
I hear what you are saying but most people are not legal eagles and don't make any distinction between libel and having a whinge. They don't read a review that says "this company was rubbish, took ages to response to any queries, treated me like an idiot and didn't explain the charges they would be levying properly" and think "hmm, sounds like the company for me". They don't then see a review saying "bunch of scammers and cheats" and think, "whoa whoa whoa, hold the phone, I had better not use these guys".
Legally speaking, one is fine and the other isn't but that doesn't mean you shouldn't use common sense as a law firm and just respond to the complaint maturely.
This is how every company works. The phrase "the customer is always right" is entirely due to this. The customer is not always right but you stand to lose a lot more by arguing the toss than you do by sucking it up and taking the higher ground.
Just because I understand and know the law doesn't mean I have to agree with it or the way its implemented.
That being said, trying to ruin a company over a single incident of a customer being a bit of a ***** and the company massively overreacting is just as silly. A company is 99% worker drones and 1% management ******* when it comes to these decisions. I doubt they took a all hands on deck meeting to decide what to do. People will probably lose jobs over this.
