6 ms·

Seems perfectly reasonable to go after someone for libel for literally committing libel. The guy shamelessly lied and called the law firm a "scam".

by jboog 6y ago

henryaj 6y ago
What lies did he tell?
- BoorishBears 6y ago
  > He then left a review accusing the firm of being "another scam solicitor", according to court documents. > The firm took legal action, stating that this was untrue and defamatory. Seeing as he pulled the old "give me back my money and I'll delete that" it sure sounds like the typical leave a bad review for leverage strategy, his mistake was straight up lying. - I got in a dispute with an apartment management over my deposit and left a review with dozens upon dozens of well documented missteps they had taken during my tenancy complete with pictures. I didn't lie and I didn't embellish... 20 minutes later I got a call that my deposit was being refunded in full and asking if I could kindly take down my review. I hadn't lied in it so I never took it down, but I did condense it, removed the pictures and mentioned they had returned my deposit finally.
  - Nasrudith 6y ago
    That is considered a lie in the UK? In the US that would be considered an obvious equivalent of "shitty and only out for themselves". Everyone already knows lawyers are master of screwing you over with contracts legally.
    - jboog 6y ago
      That's because it is usually perfectly legal to lie about someone in the US and just call it "hyperbole" or something. Our libel laws are incredibly permissive in the US. See Elon Musk calling a guy a "pedo" repeatedly with zero evidence, because he pissed him off online. Although there were other issues in that case. The UK has way more strict libel laws than the US. If you lie about someone it's a LOT easier to get a civil judgment against you. Hency why a ton of magazines/newspapers have been successfully sued over libel whereas in the US this almost never happens.
    - leephillips 6y ago
      No, it would not. A “scam” is a scheme to defraud, it’s an allegation of illegality.
    - isoskeles 6y ago
      I get annoyed when I read people claim a business is a “scam” when their real problem is something clearer like the products are too expensive. Can we reserve the word “scam” for actual scams, or am I really expected to divine the true meaning of these troglodytes’ reviews? I just ignore them.
      - BoorishBears 6y ago
        Scam is the go to word to try falsely throw a company under the bus without needing to go into specifics, I also ignore those reviews. If a business really wrongs someone, people tend to be willing to go into detail about how they were wronged. Especially since it sucks and if you're willing to write a review, you're probably also willing to make it one that informs others specifically what went wrong so they can avoid it.
  - mikro2nd 6y ago
    If I read correctly, he also didn't pitch up at court to defend his position, so the judgement went to the law firm.
dhosek 6y ago
It's also worth noting that UK libel laws are considerably more liberal than the US libel laws. A statement that would be fine in the US could result in a life-shattering judgment in the UK.
- cyberpunk 6y ago
  Do you mean more conservative?
  - wayneftw 6y ago
    Conservative would be less use of law and government, liberal would be more.
    - cyberpunk 6y ago
      Ah you mean liberal as in amount, not liberal as in more permissive. That was confusing, cheers.
    - quietbritishjim 6y ago
      > liberal would be more [use of law and government] That is not what liberal means. In fact the confusing setence in your previous comment has basically the opposite meaning than you meant: more liberal libel laws would be less strict.
      - wayneftw 6y ago
        It wasn't my comment, but there is more than one meaning for the word liberal. [0] I was going with adjective 2. relating to or denoting a political and social philosophy that promotes individual rights, civil liberties, democracy, and free enterprise. I took "more liberal" to mean "more left" as in the political spectrum of Left vs Right, Liberal vs Conservative because that's the only definition that really fits the context of the sentence... Despite the fact that Liberalism has much more to do with Liberty than liberal use of government, Liberals today certainly want to use the government liberally to make new laws for solving any small discomfort. [0] https://www.google.com/search?q=define+liberal https://www.google.com/search?q=define+liberal
CydeWeys 6y ago
There is some nuance there though as that could be mere hyperbole/figure of speech, rather than a specific allegation of unethical business practices. What hurt him more is that he didn't show up to defend himself. Musk successfully used the hyperbole defense against the much more serious potential libel "pedo", though admittedly that was in US court.
IshKebab 6y ago
Sure if it isn't a scam. But the article also said: > 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." Which sounds pretty scammy to me.
- jboog 6y ago
  Because certainly no one would ever lie or exaggerate on the internet!
oh_sigh 6y ago
First of all, the judgement was because the guy never showed up for court. He might have won if he did. More importantly, he called it a scam, and it isn't clear that that is a lie. He alleges that he paid for work, but they just rephrased the documents he gave them. Why wouldn't that be a scam?

Seems perfectly reasonable to go after someone for libel for literally committing libel. The guy shamelessly lied and called the law firm a "scam".

by jboog 6y ago

Seems perfectly reasonable to go after someone for libel for literally committing libel. The guy shamelessly lied and called the law firm a "scam".

henryaj 6y ago

What lies did he tell?

BoorishBears 6y ago
> He then left a review accusing the firm of being "another scam solicitor", according to court documents. > The firm took legal action, stating that this was untrue and defamatory. Seeing as he pulled the old "give me back my money and I'll delete that" it sure sounds like the typical leave a bad review for leverage strategy, his mistake was straight up lying. - I got in a dispute with an apartment management over my deposit and left a review with dozens upon dozens of well documented missteps they had taken during my tenancy complete with pictures. I didn't lie and I didn't embellish... 20 minutes later I got a call that my deposit was being refunded in full and asking if I could kindly take down my review. I hadn't lied in it so I never took it down, but I did condense it, removed the pictures and mentioned they had returned my deposit finally.
- Nasrudith 6y ago
  That is considered a lie in the UK? In the US that would be considered an obvious equivalent of "shitty and only out for themselves". Everyone already knows lawyers are master of screwing you over with contracts legally.
  - jboog 6y ago
    That's because it is usually perfectly legal to lie about someone in the US and just call it "hyperbole" or something. Our libel laws are incredibly permissive in the US. See Elon Musk calling a guy a "pedo" repeatedly with zero evidence, because he pissed him off online. Although there were other issues in that case. The UK has way more strict libel laws than the US. If you lie about someone it's a LOT easier to get a civil judgment against you. Hency why a ton of magazines/newspapers have been successfully sued over libel whereas in the US this almost never happens.
  - leephillips 6y ago
    No, it would not. A “scam” is a scheme to defraud, it’s an allegation of illegality.
  - isoskeles 6y ago
    I get annoyed when I read people claim a business is a “scam” when their real problem is something clearer like the products are too expensive. Can we reserve the word “scam” for actual scams, or am I really expected to divine the true meaning of these troglodytes’ reviews? I just ignore them.
    - BoorishBears 6y ago
      Scam is the go to word to try falsely throw a company under the bus without needing to go into specifics, I also ignore those reviews. If a business really wrongs someone, people tend to be willing to go into detail about how they were wronged. Especially since it sucks and if you're willing to write a review, you're probably also willing to make it one that informs others specifically what went wrong so they can avoid it.
- mikro2nd 6y ago
  If I read correctly, he also didn't pitch up at court to defend his position, so the judgement went to the law firm.

dhosek 6y ago

It's also worth noting that UK libel laws are considerably more liberal than the US libel laws. A statement that would be fine in the US could result in a life-shattering judgment in the UK.

cyberpunk 6y ago
Do you mean more conservative?
- wayneftw 6y ago
  Conservative would be less use of law and government, liberal would be more.
  - cyberpunk 6y ago
    Ah you mean liberal as in amount, not liberal as in more permissive. That was confusing, cheers.
  - quietbritishjim 6y ago
    > liberal would be more [use of law and government] That is not what liberal means. In fact the confusing setence in your previous comment has basically the opposite meaning than you meant: more liberal libel laws would be less strict.
    - wayneftw 6y ago
      It wasn't my comment, but there is more than one meaning for the word liberal. [0] I was going with adjective 2. relating to or denoting a political and social philosophy that promotes individual rights, civil liberties, democracy, and free enterprise. I took "more liberal" to mean "more left" as in the political spectrum of Left vs Right, Liberal vs Conservative because that's the only definition that really fits the context of the sentence... Despite the fact that Liberalism has much more to do with Liberty than liberal use of government, Liberals today certainly want to use the government liberally to make new laws for solving any small discomfort. [0] https://www.google.com/search?q=define+liberal https://www.google.com/search?q=define+liberal

CydeWeys 6y ago

There is some nuance there though as that could be mere hyperbole/figure of speech, rather than a specific allegation of unethical business practices. What hurt him more is that he didn't show up to defend himself. Musk successfully used the hyperbole defense against the much more serious potential libel "pedo", though admittedly that was in US court.

IshKebab 6y ago

Sure if it isn't a scam. But the article also said: > 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." Which sounds pretty scammy to me.

jboog 6y ago
Because certainly no one would ever lie or exaggerate on the internet!

oh_sigh 6y ago

First of all, the judgement was because the guy never showed up for court. He might have won if he did. More importantly, he called it a scam, and it isn't clear that that is a lie. He alleges that he paid for work, but they just rephrased the documents he gave them. Why wouldn't that be a scam?