Disgruntled Aussies who may be tempted to leave a negative online review about a business have been warned to keep a cool head and stick to the facts after a Melbourne man was left facing a $1 million bill for defaming a group of builders.

Gurvinderpal Singh was ordered to cough up the whopping penalty after he falsely alleged Singh Homes had performed shoddy work in a viral TikTok video, claiming his family’s life had been ‘ruined’ during the construction of his house.

Last week, the County Court of Victoria ordered Mr Singh to pay $105,000 to each of Singh Homes’ two directors for defaming them, on top of an earlier $673,000 award to the company, plus legal costs and interest.

The court heard the relationship between the parties soured amid a dispute over delays, payments and the quality of the building work, with Mr Singh taking to social media in 2024 with a scathing review and video about Singh Homes.

The TikTok video, which was uploaded in Punjabi, attracted about 220,000 views and contained a series of false allegations about the company and its directors, even suggesting Mr Singh had been driven to suicide by the ordeal.

‘I had a very bad experience with Singh Homes,’ Gurvinderpal said, according to a translation cited in a court judgment. ‘During the construction of the house … from the slab stage until now, whatever they … finished, major faults were found in everything.

‘Many times, you call them, and they won’t give any response to you because their time is valuable but your time has no value.

‘A person thinks that he should commit suicide by throwing himself under a train; they put you in such a situation.’

Gurvinderpal Singh has been ordered to pay Singh Homes more than $1million after posted a now deleted Tiktok video defaming them

The builder and its directors, Parvinder Sarwara and Daman Anand (pictured), launched legal action after alleging Mr Singh’s online campaign drove customers away

The builder and its directors, Parvinder Sarwara and Daman Anand, launched legal action in 2025, alleging Mr Singh’s online campaign drove customers away and inflicted losses of more than $1 million.

Mr Singh’s claims went before a jury, which found they were untrue.

Experienced defamation lawyer Michael Finch, from HFK Lawyers, told Daily Mail Australia the case shows Aussies need to be careful about how they leave a negative review to avoid exposing themselves to legal action.

‘People don’t realise that the furious actions they make when they’re being keyboard warriors can have such huge and profound effects,’ he said.

‘You have to be careful around saying that you don’t think other people should give business to them. When you start telling people not to attend somewhere, you need to back it with a good reason as to why you say that. And it has to be a truthful experience.

‘If you posted something and you wake up in the morning and think, “Was that the best idea?” You should probably delete it. This is a prime example of what it can cost a person.’

Describing the Singh case as ‘particularly egregious’ due to the high costs ordered by the court, Mr Finch said the harm caused by defaming someone can ‘magnify’ if those claims are broadcast to a tight-knit community, such as the Indian community.

‘When you start saying things like you want to commit suicide as a result of someone’s actions, that sits fairly high on the scale of harm,’ Mr Finch said.

Defamation lawyer Michael Finch described the case as ‘particularly egregious’

Mr Finch said people needed to ensure they are being truthful when they leave a negative review online, or they may face legal action (stock image)

The builder successfully sued Mr Singh over viral social media posts that it said damaged its business (pictured is a Singh Homes property under construction)

‘He’s frustrated, clearly, but if you want to make a review, you avoid that type of emotive communication.’

It comes after the court heard that the Singh Homes directors felt shunned by the Indian community after the defamatory video and review were published.

‘I believed I was being falsely blamed for being a thief or being dishonest… I know that the Indian community were following this trial because a lot of people were asking me about it,’ Mr Sarwara said in his affidavit.

Australia’s defamation laws were overhauled in 2021 to stop trivial cases of reputational damage from being brought before the courts.

Claimants must now demonstrate real and substantial harm, which is what Mr Anand and Mr Sarwara managed to establish.

Most companies also cannot sue for defamation, as a defamation claim can only be launched by a company with fewer than 10 employees.

While ‘truth’ is a complete defence to any claim of defamation across Australia, Mr Finch said you do not have to prove that your review is 100 per cent true, but it has to be ‘substantially true.’

‘Honest opinion is also a defence,’ he said. ‘But it has to be tempered whether or not that the person making the statement had a reasonable belief that what they were saying is actually true. 

Gurvinderpal Singh and his wife hired Singh Homes to build a house in the fast-growing Melbourne suburb of Truganina (pictured) in 2022

‘You can’t just go round saying whatever you feel like and qualifying it with, “Well, in my opinion…”

Mr Finch said he is increasingly seeing social media influencers fall into this trap.

‘Influencers need to be aware because of the value they hold within their community, people listen to them,’ he said. 

‘They are the type of people who are more likely to become more liable for these type of cases than the average person.’

He advised anyone who receives a concerns notice – a formal written notice to a publisher of a defamatory publication – to engage with it and to try and make an offer of amends.

This article does not constitute legal advice.

Do you know more? Email tips@dailymail.com.au 

– READ MORE: Melbourne homeowner savaged his builder in a viral TikTok review… now he faces a bill tipped to top $1MILLION after losing defamation battle