Defending a defamation claim and disclosure telephone hearing

[Skitrel]

Hi guys,

 

I've got a defamation claim against me.

 

The circumstances are unusual, I didn't make the review but it was made with my account.

 

I do not know how this occurred, my speculation is that it was the result of some sort of account breach, though the claim was started very close to a year after the review was made and I am unable to get any evidence that suggests such. I have no links to the claimant, didn't know who they were prior to the claim and did not know about the defamatory review. Due to the time between it being made and me becoming aware of it I've been able to dig up no evidence to defend the fact that I didn't write it. There's plenty of potential scope for someone doing something malicious like this though, I head and moderate as part of teams some extremely large communities on reddit that get millions of users per month, it's quite possible some angsty teenager decided to lash out as a result of moderator actions, but of course, I have no proof.

 

The claimant suggests I was paid to do this, and cites certain negative aspects of the SEO industry and "reputation management" as being why I may have done it.

 

I've attempted to cooperate in every way I feel reasonable, but they're having none of it. I gave them permission to look at bank records to show that's not the case, as well as information that would give them access to my SEO work in order to try and show them otherwise and attempt a reasonable conclusion.

 

One thing I do not want to give them complete unmitigated access to is my google account (which the review was made from) due to the fact the account has such an enormous amount of deeply personal and completely irrelevant information on it. I've tried being reasonable with them, I've asked them to narrow down precisely what they want from the account in order for me to cooperate without giving them anything that's completely irrelevant, the account has been used for a very long time and due to google's nature is connected to an enormous number of services, not to mention tens of thousands of emails.

 

I have a telephone hearing on the 20th of January for disclosure, they're seeking complete access to my google account and my computers.

 

What options do I have available?

 

I am unable to get legal aid. Defamation cases are not covered. The CAB have been useless. I really need some expert help, the claimant (an american lawyer) has made it quite clear he will pursue the case for the sake of damage to his reputation, he's already spent thousands and knows full well I'm unemployed and broke, hoping that it will go away because it really isn't worth anything to him isn't going to happen.

 

This claim was started shortly before there were changes in defamation law, he has no need to prove any damages actually occurred as a result and this is being held under older laws I believe.

[steampowered]

Only a telephone hearing? At whose request?

 

Would need to know a bit more about the procedural history here Skitrel ... did the claimant file an application seeking specific disclosure and have you filed documents to oppose this?

 

Is he represented? If so, are you able to offer his solicitors access to your google account on the basis that only they will get access and not their client?

[Ganymede]

I think you need to find a solicitor.

 

This is too complicated for a self help forum.

[mjt2013]

Haha, Ganymede is on it today! Every time I go to write something I see he's got there before me

[Ganymede]

Haha, Ganymede is on it today! Every time I go to write something I see he's got there before me

 

 

 

Too slow!

[Skitrel]

Only a telephone hearing? At whose request?

 

Would need to know a bit more about the procedural history here Skitrel ... did the claimant file an application seeking specific disclosure and have you filed documents to oppose this?

 

Is he represented? If so, are you able to offer his solicitors access to your google account on the basis that only they will get access and not their client?

 

He filed and a telephone hearing was set for the specific disclosure request. I have yet to put in my defence for this hearing. If what you're suggesting is that there was an opportunity to file documents to oppose the application for disclosure before a hearing was set I wasn't aware of that, I didn't receive a notification that an application for disclosure had been made, only threats from the claimant's representatives that they were going to make the application, not that it had been made (until receiving the hearing date).

 

They are represented by a British solicitors, Pitmans.

 

I understand this is quite complicated and that the best way forward would of course be representation, that however is outside of my means. As noted before there is no legal aid for defamation cases and I can not afford representation. The absolute best I can do is to seek help from others experienced with the system. You guys helped my dad out enormously with a troublesome situation he was in many months ago, for his privacy I won't disclose details but he was enormously grateful as the help and advice he received here won him his case entirely.

 

I'm really hoping you fine people will take pity on me and won't just dismiss my thread because it's a complicated scenario. I really don't have anywhere else to turn and welcome any suggestions, possibilities, help and advice.

[steampowered]

OK, understand about the solicitor. Many law centres focus on things like debt, employment issues and benefits so understandable that they many are not too comfortable dealing with defamation.

 

Its a bit unusual that a telephone hearing has been ordered when there is a litigant in person involved ... but it is what it is. You will need to make sure your witness statement is very clear and that you prepare to express yourself clearly and concisely.

 

Do we know which google account the review was posted from?

 

I would think the google account is relevant and hence disclosure may be ordered. With sensitive information like this I have sometimes offered disclosure to the other side's solicitors, on the basis of a formal undertaking that (1) the information will be kept confidential, (2) it will be destroyed afterwards, (3) it will not be shown to the client. People are usually comfortable with this on the basis that breach of the undertaking would subject to the solicitors to regulatory action by the SRA. If you are confident that your account is clean this is a good approach. It is also strategic positioning, as gives you a good reason to say you shouldn't have to pay legal costs even if you lose at the hearing.

 

As this is not small claims track its important to be aware you will be ordered to pay legal costs if you lose at the hearing, which could easily be several hundred. The court will not take into account your ability to pay.

 

If you want help with opposing the application we would need a lot more information ... what the claim is about, what the review says, what loss he is claiming, what their witness statement says about the reasons for the application ... ideally post up the documents with personal information removed.

[steampowered]

another site team member has kindly mentioned this - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/Amazon/8880832/Author-sues-reviewer-over-comments-on-Amazon.html

[silverfox1961]

another site team member has kindly mentioned this - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/Amazon/8880832/Author-sues-reviewer-over-comments-on-Amazon.html

 

And this is the thread in mention

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?323142-vjohn82-Libel-Case&highlight=chris+mcgrath

[Skitrel]

Will I be doing anything I shouldn't be doing by posting up documentation? I can't find anything that suggests I would be, but I'm trying to be as risk averse as possible as this has been quite stressful.

 

I can probably get it all together for tomorrow, will need to hijack a scanner.

 

Prior to that, the brief details are as follows. The review (since removed by myself at the request of the claimant) was "****** [lawyer name], pays for fake reviews, loses 80% of his cases, not a happy camper."

 

As stated before, I didn't make it, know of this American lawyer or his firm (based in America) until the claim against me. It was made from my google account on his google review page.

 

My issue with the relevancy of accessing my google account is that there's nothing relevant about having vast access to information outside seeking who made the review in the first place. All that can be discerned from access to my account is that it was in fact made by the account, there's no more information than that. I've been completely cooperative with giving permission to other things they wanted access to that didn't really affect personal privacy concerns on quite personal matters, as you might expect from it being a personal account. In short, what they need is permission to ask google for information relevant to the origin the post came from, their logs, those aren't accessible for me, they would clearly show the origin wasn't my location though, that's if they even still have them because the guy took nearly a full year between the review being posted and actually making the claim which I find quite odd.

 

That's the long and short of it really. For the defamation claim they're arguing I was paid for it or that it was a malicious "prank".

 

As for costs, I'm aware if I lose I'll be collared for the legal costs, he's already racked it up to the £10-20k range to my knowledge, possibly higher now, it's completely disproportionate to a meaningless review on a presumably hardly visited review page in my opinion.

 

I'll get the documents sorted for reading for tomorrow.

[obiter dictum]

Is this a claim in the American Courts or UK?

[honeybee13]

Hello there.

 

I think if you remove any identifying information from the documents you post up, you should be fine. Steampowered and others from the site team, plus eagle eyed forum members, will see if there's anything sensitive.

 

The information will enable people to give you tailored advice.

 

HB

[citizenB]

If you wish to remove anything personal and then email them to me using the address below.. steampowered and others can check if it will be ok to post them on the forum.

 

email..

 

[email protected] (no spaces).

 

Please do let me know when you have sent them, if you are going to use this method

[oleg]

@CitizenB

I have sent you urgent PM about this

Pls confirm in this thread that you have received as I won't be able to open my inbox in this phone .

[citizenB]

I have received it and although I don't quite understand, I will get it sorted

[steampowered]

Will I be doing anything I shouldn't be doing by posting up documentation? I can't find anything that suggests I would be, but I'm trying to be as risk averse as possible as this has been quite stressful.

 

No. Court documents are matters of the public record. In theory anybody could turn up to court and get a copy of the Particulars of Claim and Defence in your case.

 

There is a risk that the other side's solicitors will read this thread, but realistically it probably doesn't matter a great deal if they do.

 

Prior to that, the brief details are as follows. The review (since removed by myself at the request of the claimant) was "****** [lawyer name], pays for fake reviews, loses 80% of his cases, not a happy camper."

 

As stated before, I didn't make it, know of this American lawyer or his firm (based in America) until the claim against me. It was made from my google account on his google review page.

 

Mmm, this does not sound like a convincing story to me. Someone hijacked your google account just to post a fake review? Very odd.

 

In the civil court system there is no need for absolute proof. The claim will be decided on a balance of probabilities. Unless you have a more convincing tale to the contrary, the judge could conclude that a review posted from your google account was posted by you on a balance of probabilities.

 

My issue with the relevancy of accessing my google account is that there's nothing relevant about having vast access to information outside seeking who made the review in the first place. All that can be discerned from access to my account is that it was in fact made by the account, there's no more information than that. I've been completely cooperative with giving permission to other things they wanted access to that didn't really affect personal privacy concerns on quite personal matters, as you might expect from it being a personal account. In short, what they need is permission to ask google for information relevant to the origin the post came from, their logs, those aren't accessible for me, they would clearly show the origin wasn't my location though, that's if they even still have them because the guy took nearly a full year between the review being posted and actually making the claim which I find quite odd.

 

Surely their witness statement explains why they want access? What does the witness statement say?

[Skitrel]

Delayed on getting everything edited to remove personal info, quite a lot to run through as it includes all of our correspondence back and forth while I tried to be cooperative with them. Will definitely send an email first prior to posting up here.

 

The fact that it's a one off is odd. I do change passwords fairly regularly however. If someone uses phishing to acquire accounts to do this kind of thing with they may have many accounts and a password change may have occurred between one use of the account and another attempted use. I can only speculate on the usage of the attacker though, I've had at least one login I know of occur though that will be in google's logs somewhere as I was directly warned by google's automated systems that it was flagged as a suspicious login (from Hungary or something). It doesn't coincide with any of the dates of this review though and I never found out what that login may have done, I put that one down to attempted bank fraud and did a full security sweep of changing passwords to anything and everything, but it could have just been an automated bot that was testing for successful logins and an actual person never got round to using the account prior to my changes.

 

Steam, yes the witness statement does state why they want access. To determine the source of the posting. Is arguing that access won't provide the source of the posting a viable defence then as it provides no access to google's logs and suggesting that I simply provide my permission to have google's logs reasonable?