Consumer forums: where do we start!


Consumer forums

There is no doubt that consumer forums can offer a wealth of information and knowledge and you get to learn about things you previously didn’t even know were possible. The web, as a whole, is full of resources you can access and read at any time, however, when you need to ask a question, there’s often no-one there for you. The CABs are always overloaded and understaffed and the quality of advice can vary wildly depending on who you talk to. When you need help, forums are there for you at any time of day or night, 365 days a year. However, their owners don’t always have your best interests at heart. They are often self-serving.

What makes a forum?

Forums are just groups of people who post in sequence, answering each other’s questions, making comments and adding to the discussion. They depend on their members for their existence, without posters there are no forums. Getting people to join and post can be surprisingly difficult, even people you know as avid forum posters are reluctant to post on a nearly-empty site and will go to established sites where they know their posts will be read, even if they also know they will be criticised and possibly attacked for their posts.

A new site is born

Over the years, a number of sites have emerged, often set up by people who got together on other sites and disagreed with the direction they were taking and/or ended up being banned. They always say their new site will be different and they won’t do any of the “bad” things the other admins did, and somehow end up behaving in a very similar way. Legal Beagles was a spin-off from CAG where people were often banned for no reason and debate was discouraged, yet they are doing the exact same thing on their own site.

New forums initially welcome new contributors and are happy to invite regulars to join the ranks of admins, site team and moderators, create groups for certain interests, offer access to private areas and give awards for posting and participation, all to encourage people to stay and contribute. Unlike most other websites where you can have a lot of traffic simply from visitors to the site, forums cannot exist without contributors, that is, people who log in and post regularly, answer other people’s questions and start threads of their own.

What happens next

When a forum becomes established, posts are indexed by google and the site is found by anyone looking for similar information, however, this is only the beginning. In a world of constant change, we all expect information to be up-to-date. If we come across a post that’s even a few months old, we wonder whether that still applies today and if we see a site that doesn’t get posted on very often, we are more likely to read and run than sign up and stay. If we see that questions are left unanswered, we tend not to bother posting one ourselves.

There are several consumer forums out there, Legal Beagles is just one of them. Some would rather discuss, say, CAG, so why not do it here.


  1. peterbard says:

    I have decided to post this as a last response on here in an attempt to clear up a few misconceptions in this thread.
    The slanging match which took place here was entirely my fault, not that I initiated it, but because I attempted to respond in kind to the abuse which I had been subject to for the last year or so.
    It is very frustrating being the subject of abuse and not being able to respond and I took this opportunity to do so.
    This manner of addressing people is completely alien to me, and I have to say that some of the content was written through gritted teeth, it is just not my style. They are well practised, and of course I am ill prepared to compete at that level.
    This is evidences by the posts made by them going back to 2013, they have always used the same language and attitude, being a professional person it is abhorrent to me, I was bound to fail.
    Next I should have recognised the signs when Pote appeared and rescued Mark from a failed argument by questioning my spelling, looking back this is well used ploy to take focus off the loosing point and focus on an irrelevant issue, I fell for it hook line and sinker.
    Factual points.
    My reference to Mark as Monkey man was entirely as a response to him calling me a chimp for the last 6 months, there was simply no other thought in my head. I had no idea about his race and to be honest it never even crossed my mind, this again is probably because as said I am new to this kind of conflict. You can either believe this or that I am a closet racist and the former is just a coincidence.
    I did not receive any of my “information” from anyone else, the Ian Olny quote is from Cag and I think I included the link, if you want to find it, just put Ian Olny in the search and it there, along with many others. I knew this was a previously user name of is because he has mentioned it several times.
    My mention of him and his ex was purely a response to him saying he was sat looking at pictures of me, and also Pote mentioning my wife and the date of our marriage.
    Here again my contributions where reactive, I did not incite any of this,
    I did not have any picture of him I was lying because I was annoyed (I incidentally also have no idea of his skin colour, and consider it irrelevant any in any case).
    I had an idea his other half’s name was ….. Because over the last couple of years someone must have mentioned it. I did not know he had been divorced. Incidentally I presume the copy of the marriage license is how Pote found my wedding date, I had no idea you could do this, and a little more hypocrisy perhaps?
    Regarding Sheila, she is a friend of mine and unsurprisingly we talk, I am protective of my friends and am very disappointed when one of them betrays my trust, I will not do this to her, and I know she would not do it to me, make of that what you will.

    I wish you all a happy new year. I shall now go and post where i know that, if I do make an error I will not be called a cretin.

  2. Mark says:

    My kids mother has never been mentioned on these forums before-Why would it have been? So how did you discover her name?

    You had no idea that I was Ian Olney (or Butterfingers for that matter) You even responded to Ian on the thread-Sheila told you that these user names were me.

    You have posted more abuse in this thread, than I have since 2013, so spare us the “its completely alien to me” nonsense.

    You also admitted to having a report on my company-Is that something else you “think” has previously been posted?

    You forget-I’ve received the Sheila files myself in the past-All the Jason stuff. It is how she works. She is a nosey, nause. I would imagine that she drives the enforcement industry mad with her meddling.

    You see Peter-Just like you, she is a bluffer and a poser. She has grown up around people who peep behind their curtains, looking with evny and hatred at their neighbours-Phoning social services to report they are mistreating their children or phoning DHSS to report on them. She does the same thing now-anonymously contacting organisations, informing them to investigate her enemies whpm she also looks upon with hatred & envy.-Jason will vouch for this and I’m fully expecting the same at some point. You can take the woman out of the council estate but you can’t take the council estate out of the woman.

    Nice to see you finally admitting that you’ve lied. Only the tip of the iceberg of course, but pleasing all the same. Ironic, given only 2 days ago, you were accusing others of being the liars.

    All the excuses in the world will not excuse your behaviour on this thread. You let your guard down cock and we got a glimpse of the real Peter. Go back to being “Peter 1” for all I care. We both know the score. Just because nobody will call you a cretin on CAG, doesn’t make it not true. You are an uneducated bully and a coward – All the classic traits of a racist. If you have admitted lying about one thing, why should we believe you in your other claims? I certainly don’t-Not for one minute.

    And finally Peter-You have never won an argument with me-Not here, not anywhere. I don’t know whether this is something you just fail to see, or whether you just state it to save face. I’ve given up trying to work it out and am certainly way past caring.

  3. peterbard says:

    Mark. It really is not necessary for me to respond to this, because you make all my points for me. But I will at least to the parts i understand. every bit of information i have on you is readily available on the net, company house, 192 search etc.

    Regarding the abuse, i dont think you realise how you address people when you’re on a forum, anyone can go on any forum where you have posted and see what you are like, I need say nothing. I have always known you were butterfingers Mark because you post the same way on there as you do everywhere else, cretin bluffer etc, you have been using these insults for years, makes you stand out like a sore thumb.

    As to wining and argument with you, Mark really ?
    The reason you have to post on the cesspit is because I have had you and your silly theories thrown off every decent forum available same with pote.

    As for being a bully, I again ask you t look at your last post,
    You seem to think I m the exception in general opinion of you, Mark wake up, no one considers you as a source of information except the people you post with, and even you must have an opinion if their abilities.

    Now just for clarity, I do not want to be involved with you or you silly friends any more, I wish I had never corrected you when I first came across you, because it seems that inevitably self destruct anyway.
    Finally I found it somewhat odd that you like to fantasize about me in my underwear, sorry cock but I do not swing that way, and if I did you are not my type.

    • Mark says:

      Even in your parting shots, its all about you isn’t it?

      By your own admission, the slanging match was entirely your fault-No apology to admin though was there? No, instead you say it’s my fault that you did it and mention quotes going back to 2013.

      Again, you lying was all my fault as well, because you felt “annoyed”

      I don’t “have” to post on BHF, I chose to post there because that is the board where I feel my loyalties lie. This is to the detriment of debtors on CAG, who are generally given poor advice-The “Jacobs and Council Tax” being a prime example (if it isn’t a Sheila spoof)

      Regarding being considered a source of information-This is where you and me differ. To you, it is the be all and end all. To me, I couldn’t give a fcuk. I certainly couldn’t give a fcuk what people on CAG think and I know that many of the better posters on there respect my views because they have told me so. Peter Felton once asked Sheila if I was a solicitor-I bet she never told you that did she? Funny how that didn’t make its way into her files isn’t it? All this “nobody takes you seriously” nonsense goes in one ear & out the other-I’d wager that its you who is not taken seriously by anyone.

      I’ve sorted two debtors problems out, this morning alone-More than you did for the whole of 2015. That’s what matters to me Peter, not the opinions of cretins and bluffers over on CAG

      In all your accusations on here, you have not once provided any evidence to back them up-All this money you say I’m raking in off debtors-Wheres your proof? All these debtors who have been given wrong advice and ended up paying more-Where are the links to these posts? You can’t provide any can you? It is just accusations for accusations sake-Something that you specialise in. Now run along to the “highly respected forum” where all the bailiffs are and keep on telling those debtors to pay at the earliest opportunity but make sure you remember Peter:

      Actions will always speak louder than words.

  4. Big Al says:

    You’ve had me thrown off every decent forum? How’s that then? Are you admitting that the forum owners pander to your every whim? That is certainly revealing Petey old cock.

    The only forum that I am banned from when I make it obvious who I am, is CAG. I’d love to know all the other forums you’ve supposedly got me banned from. Still not found the CAG username yet have you? Keep looking.

    Oh and it’s good to see that you have finally conceded on CAG that you don’t know everything.

  5. Mark says:

    Just in case there is any doubt about the racist tone of Peters comments, here is one from earlier in the thread:

    “Did kids used to call you a chimp when you were younger ? I can see why, but kids can be so cruel cant they. ”

    What could Peter see? I’d wager that he was looking at a photo from one of the Facebook pages and got the wrong bloke completely. Peters vitriol increased daily on this thread, reaching the crescendo with the “monkey man” jibes. He then has the added dimension to claim:

    “They are well practised, and of course I am ill prepared to compete at that level.”

    Utterly aickening behaviour from an utterly sickening individual.

  6. Shazza says:

    You do try to make yourself out to be holier than thou which really doesn’t wash

    Are you Mark 1960 from BHF and is Big Al is Pote ,

    You can be extremely abusive on forums, especially when you have the protection of the admin, then when its not you being abusive you join the pack mentality of Pote and Amy although to his credit Jason seems to rarely join in .

    I know you slate Cag and I think most forums are the same, the power goes to peoples heads, just look at AAD and LB, as well as BHF and Cag. As for get out of debt free , well what can be said that wouldn’t condem them all to the loony bin.

    The fact that you are still on BHF amazes me as on many occasions you disagreed with Jason , you must be the only one that ever does.I didn’t think that was allowed , but good for you

    I knew you were butterfingers as well as Ian Olney and I know it wasn’t Peter who told me as I don’t recall ever having spoken to him.

  7. Legaleaglet says:

    Guys, and, for the sake of clarity, I mean EVERYBODY. Nothing whatsoever is achieved by name calling, regardless of whether there are any racist implications or not. Calling Mark a “monkey man” is not the way to approach things and neither is referring to Peter as a “chimp”. You guys may disagree all you want about what each one of you posts with regards to bailiff or debt issues, there’s no reason to descend into insults and name calling. The problem here is that, when one poster does it, the other one does the same, thinking they have the right because they are being a victim of the other side’s abuse, however, this only results in yet more abuse and more name calling and leads nowhere.

    Why not do a New Year resolution to stop the insults and the name calling and stick to the issues. You guys can say what you want about the other posters’ advice or statements and disagree all you want without abuse or insults. Why not give peace a chance?

    • Mark says:

      I don’t class calling Peter a “chimp” as abuse

      He’s as thick as two short planks-That much is clear for everyone to see. “Chimp” seems apt. Its kind of like a nickname for him.

      Likewise calling him a “cretin”. I mean seriously, who other than a complete cretin would come out with a statement such as “on block”-Surely even you must have cringed for him when he posted that.

      If he stops trying to pick on weaker people in order to disguise his own inabilities, I will leave him alone. I do not like bullies though and if he continues, I will remain on his case.

  8. Shazza says:

    Mark bless you

    You really don’t get it do you

    Are you saying you are weaker than Peter?

    If calling Peter chimp is a nickname is that any different to calling you what he has done.

    Why can’t everyone just be civil to each other , if you started the truce maybe it would give you the moral high ground

    • Mark says:

      When you post using your usual name, be that WD or whatever, you will get a proper response.

      We’re all friends on here. There’s no need to hide behind anonymity like you do on goodf etc

      • Mark says:

        Ah bless-Our cowardly internet troll has crawled back beneath her stone-Not brave enough to reveal her true identity. She
        was more than happy to dig others out though-such as myself, Pote, Jason & Amy., from the safety of anonymity of course.

        • Legaleaglet says:

          I just posted up above in response to Shazza that there’s no admin protection on here, however, as with any other public posting platform, people are entitled to their anonimity. You and Peter choose to post under your own names but I’ve got no idea who Big Al is in the real world. He chose not to reveal his ID and the same goes for Shazza. If one is allowed to stay anonymous so is the other. :)

  9. Big Al says:

    Ah but everyone knows who my forum name is – I think it’s only right that others post under recognisable names. It’s certainly a bit off to be passing yourself off as someone else. ‘Shazza’ is of course not the one we all know.

    • Legaleaglet says:

      I don’t post under a recognisable name because I don’t want to be recognised, certainly not by the one we all know, who wouldn’t be impressed if she saw the posts but heck, “Shazza” is neither her username nor her Christian name.

      • Mark says:

        Nobody is asking “Shazza” to post under her real name.

        If she wants to take cheap shots at myself, Jason, Amy & Pote, she should at least have the courage to post under her normal username instead of hiding. This is a trademark of WD and has been for as long as I’ve known her to be posting.

    • Mark says:

      I fail to see any comparison between Pote posting as Big Al (which was his LB user name) and an internet troll posting as “Shazza”

      If someone doesn’t want to be recognised then that’s absolutely fine-I have no problem with that. But if someone wants to jump in head first into the cyber spat, they should at least have the courage to let us know who they are (as in which one of Sheilas lackeys are they?)

      I’m pretty certain its WD because this is how she posts and she posts under internet troll names time & time again but that’s not the point-Why does she continually feel the need to cover her tracks? What has she got to hide?

  10. Big Al says:

    That’s the reason I posted under this name rather than ‘Pote’ as this blog is regarding LB.

    • Mark says:

      Yes, I know. You’re actually listed as “Big Al” on the list of people banned in the “Ban Club” thread. Everybody knows who “Big Al” is-You’re not trying to hide this. On the other hand, “Shazza” wants to take cheap shots at us without revealing which one of Sheilas lackeys she is. It is both sneaky & cowardly-

      • Legaleaglet says:

        Yes, Ban Club members are listed under their LB user names, not the names they used on other forums. Some of those people also posted under other user names on LB although in most cases, that would have been because they had previously been banned rather than them using a number of AEs at the same time. There is, however, no requirement to be, or have been, a registered LB member, to post a comment on this site.

        As for the person you mention above, she’s not included in either the Ban Club because, as far as I’m aware, she was never banned, nor in the buggered off club, although she may well qualify for that one as her activities on Legal Beagles seemed to have ceased after her other regular bailiff area posters were banned or buggered off. As previously stated, the bailiff area of Legal Beagles, once one of the most active parts of the site, is just a ghost town these days and, as far as I’m aware, hidden from public view, i.e. you need to be logged in to view it.

    • pepsie says:


      Until late evening of the 8th I did not know of this sites existence, a family member received an email containing a link to it and seeing my cag username brought to the fore, kindly forwarded that to me.

      I post as pepsie on LB and goodf, I post as wonkeydonkey (WD) on Cag, I do not post on DWB as they refused my registration (made using an easily recognised and known username) I only view that forum as a guest.

      I first came across Sheila in 2010 on cag and she was very helpful. When I later became clued up on the workings of HCEO;s and matters in relation to the High Court I was able to return the given help by contributing to forums. Over the years I have come to class Sheila as extremely knowledgeable in all aspects of enforcement and I applaud her for it. I would like to think we are ‘friends’ both on and off forum since we appear to have much in common other than the topic of bailiffs. I tried to support Sheila through the trials and tribulations of her cancer treatment and likewise she has supported myself through the trials and tribulations of my husbands and my own health issues. Yes Mark I am proud to class Sheila as a true friend and I fail to see how you can misconstrue that to the extent of accusing me of being ‘ Sheila’s Lackey.’

      I have nothing to hide from anyone so if you want to know anything, rather than jump to conclusions, all you have to do is ask. If wanted to take ‘cheap shots’ at you, rest assured I would not do it anonymously.

      • Legaleaglet says:

        Pepsi, welcome to the site. I want to make it clear that this site was NOT set up with the purpose of discrediting Sheila or anyone associated with her. If you look at the rest of the site, you’ll see it was, in fact, set up as a result of Legal Beagles’ decision to monetise the site and run a comparison site featuring the very same businesses they fought against all these years. However, it is only fair to allow people to express their opinion about other matters if they wish to do so.

        Mark & Big Al, I can tell you that Pepsi is not the same poster as Shazza, however, that’s as much as I can tell you. I’m not going to reveal anymore about the people who post up on here as their privacy has to be respected.

        • Mark says:

          Well seeing as you don’t tell us when the internet troll Jon is posting on BHF (despite knowing), I wasn’t holding my breath that you would tell us who “Shazza” is

          Would be hilarious if its madam herself though, given all the moral high ground she’s taken regarding internet trolls in the past.

          • Legaleaglet says:

            Mark, if everybody told me every time they decide to post on a forum, my mailbox would have blown up to bits!

            • Mark says:

              Yes-Mine would be too.

              I’d imagine that your mailbox would have been blown to bits by Jon on his own? Unless theres a secret forum somewhere where you all post pearls of wisdom such as who is using what as a username?

              • Legaleaglet says:

                The problem with that would be knowing who to trust. As A Forum Manager once said: private threads always leak, there’s always someone that tells. :(

  11. Legaleaglet says:

    As a matter of general interest, as stated below, should anyone have any issues with the content posted on this site that they wish to raise privately, they should use the envelope icon to send a message to admin. There is no visible email address to avoid spam, so please use the form.

  12. Shazza says:

    Dear Marky
    You really really don’t understand do you.
    You either publish or are party to the publishing of people’s private details on BHF with no fear because you have the protection of your playmates.
    As soon as someone questions your integrity on here you resort to abuse and run to get one of your playmates to help.

    Please let’s call a truce. No one benefits from your constant sniping

    • Mark says:

      Dear troll

      I publish no personal details on BHF, other than naming Sheila-Information that is freely available elsewhere on the WWW. It should also be remembered that Sheila has gone to great lengths to ensure that every one of her lackeys (including WD) has posted my personal details on various websites.

      Do you think I am bothered when self confessed liars like Peterbard question my integrity? I resort to abuse because I take each council tax injustice personally. I want to make sure that these debtors are helped to challenge the ruthless system that stacks odds against them-People like Peterbard & Sheila do not care twopence about these debtors-All they care about is self-promotion & slating Jason. Neither myself or Pote call for each others help to win arguments-Its hardly needed when arguing with a pair of old dinosaurs, neither of whom are the brightest.

      If you want a truce, then lets see if those two self obsessed dinosaurs can resist from posting about BHF first-You have the cheek to talk about pack mentality? Yet ignore the pack mentality that CAG has displayed for the past 3 years.

      FYI I do not have protection on BHF and have been warned by Amy in the past about my style of posting. Get you facts right-You’re beginning to sound more & more like madam herself, every time you post. Speaking of which, have you not seen that Sheila has the protection on CAG-Boring everyone to death with posts designed purely to boost Google ratings ffs.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *