5 ms·

tl;dr is man posts review that is quite possibly defamatory about a law firm, firm sues, man opts for self-representation and does not show up, man faces defaul

by evgen 6y ago

tl;dr is man posts review that is quite possibly defamatory about a law firm, firm sues, man opts for self-representation and does not show up, man faces default judgement.

henryaj 6y ago
The review seems pretty reasonable, apart from the use of the word 'scam' which the firm objected to - https://uk.trustpilot.com/reviews/5cf8eb11b055990650f42368 https://uk.trustpilot.com/reviews/5cf8eb11b055990650f42368 Hard to see how it's libel if it's an accurate reporting of his experience with the firm
- koboll 6y ago
  >In the review, Mr Waymouth alleged: "I paid upfront for a legal assessment of my case. "But what I got was just the information I sent them, reworded and sent back to me." That does kind of sound like a scam to me.
  - fmajid 6y ago
    Yes, but UK judges are always prompt to shield members of their own profession, or rich criminals like Trafigura: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2009/oct/20/trafigura-anatomy-super-injunction https://www.theguardian.com/media/2009/oct/20/trafigura-anat...
- eecks 6y ago
  is scam a protected word or something? "a scam is about tricking you into parting with your money" If I _feel_ like I have been scammed surely I can say so?
henryaj 6y ago
Defendant claims he didn't attend because he couldn't afford the costs - https://uk.trustpilot.com/reviews/6022794e679d9708b4d03f7e https://uk.trustpilot.com/reviews/6022794e679d9708b4d03f7e
- londons_explore 6y ago
  In a civil case like this, I don't think there is any form of legal aid. If you don't have the money to pay upfront, you lose. That's the way the law works. If it happens to you, just file for bankruptcy and get it sorted rapidly. You need a few hundred pounds for bankruptcy proceedings, so don't spend them on lawyers!
  - csunbird 6y ago
    > If it happens to you, just file for bankruptcy and get it sorted rapidly. You need a few hundred pounds for bankruptcy proceedings, so don't spend them on lawyers! This makes it almost impossible for you to get a credit/lease a house/work with the banks in the future. Do I feel like he over-stepped by openly calling the business scammers? Yes. Do I feel like the firm/judge was stupid to ask 6000 pounds upfront, because someone just sued you and make a ruling for 25000 afterwards? Totally. Nobody should be asked to pay that much amount before showing up to the court, just to be able to excersize their legal rights and to be able to presented , I feel like the judge made a huge mistake as well.
    - bdowling 6y ago
      > Do I feel like the firm/judge was stupid to ask 6000 pounds upfront, because someone just sued you and make a ruling for 25000 afterwards? Totally. In the UK when you lose a lawsuit you are required to pay the other party's legal costs. It appears that the defendant had previously lost on some portion of the case. Here is the paragraph of the decision relating to that: > The Defendant was ordered to pay the Claimant's costs up to and including the hearing of 6th July 2020 on the indemnity basis. This costs order has not been complied with. The Claimant seeks its costs of the disposal hearing. The schedule of costs for summary assessment seeks a further sum of £3,450. This sum is both reasonable and proportionate and I will make a costs order in the sum requested. https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2021/85.html https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2021/85.html
- notahacker 6y ago
  Defendant also told the court "I have already made it perfectly clear that this case should never be heard in court and I will not be giving it any credence or legitimacy by attending." I'd argue angry man gives legal process he doesn't understand the proverbial middle finger is a more plausible explanation for why it ended up as a summary judgement than judge invents novel way to reduce his case backlog by demanding upfront fees for the defendant to attend.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

by evgen 6y ago

tl;dr is man posts review that is quite possibly defamatory about a law firm, firm sues, man opts for self-representation and does not show up, man faces default judgement.

henryaj 6y ago

The review seems pretty reasonable, apart from the use of the word 'scam' which the firm objected to - https://uk.trustpilot.com/reviews/5cf8eb11b055990650f42368 https://uk.trustpilot.com/reviews/5cf8eb11b055990650f42368 Hard to see how it's libel if it's an accurate reporting of his experience with the firm

koboll 6y ago
>In the review, Mr Waymouth alleged: "I paid upfront for a legal assessment of my case. "But what I got was just the information I sent them, reworded and sent back to me." That does kind of sound like a scam to me.
- fmajid 6y ago
  Yes, but UK judges are always prompt to shield members of their own profession, or rich criminals like Trafigura: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2009/oct/20/trafigura-anatomy-super-injunction https://www.theguardian.com/media/2009/oct/20/trafigura-anat...
eecks 6y ago
is scam a protected word or something? "a scam is about tricking you into parting with your money" If I _feel_ like I have been scammed surely I can say so?

henryaj 6y ago

Defendant claims he didn't attend because he couldn't afford the costs - https://uk.trustpilot.com/reviews/6022794e679d9708b4d03f7e https://uk.trustpilot.com/reviews/6022794e679d9708b4d03f7e

londons_explore 6y ago
In a civil case like this, I don't think there is any form of legal aid. If you don't have the money to pay upfront, you lose. That's the way the law works. If it happens to you, just file for bankruptcy and get it sorted rapidly. You need a few hundred pounds for bankruptcy proceedings, so don't spend them on lawyers!
- csunbird 6y ago
  > If it happens to you, just file for bankruptcy and get it sorted rapidly. You need a few hundred pounds for bankruptcy proceedings, so don't spend them on lawyers! This makes it almost impossible for you to get a credit/lease a house/work with the banks in the future. Do I feel like he over-stepped by openly calling the business scammers? Yes. Do I feel like the firm/judge was stupid to ask 6000 pounds upfront, because someone just sued you and make a ruling for 25000 afterwards? Totally. Nobody should be asked to pay that much amount before showing up to the court, just to be able to excersize their legal rights and to be able to presented , I feel like the judge made a huge mistake as well.
  - bdowling 6y ago
    > Do I feel like the firm/judge was stupid to ask 6000 pounds upfront, because someone just sued you and make a ruling for 25000 afterwards? Totally. In the UK when you lose a lawsuit you are required to pay the other party's legal costs. It appears that the defendant had previously lost on some portion of the case. Here is the paragraph of the decision relating to that: > The Defendant was ordered to pay the Claimant's costs up to and including the hearing of 6th July 2020 on the indemnity basis. This costs order has not been complied with. The Claimant seeks its costs of the disposal hearing. The schedule of costs for summary assessment seeks a further sum of £3,450. This sum is both reasonable and proportionate and I will make a costs order in the sum requested. https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2021/85.html https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2021/85.html
notahacker 6y ago
Defendant also told the court "I have already made it perfectly clear that this case should never be heard in court and I will not be giving it any credence or legitimacy by attending." I'd argue angry man gives legal process he doesn't understand the proverbial middle finger is a more plausible explanation for why it ended up as a summary judgement than judge invents novel way to reduce his case backlog by demanding upfront fees for the defendant to attend.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]