Inconvenient truths

laundry

Bragging on LinkedIN

Julian Siddle, in charge of policy and communications at new Legal Beagles venture LB Compare decided to post up on LinkedIN about the seizure of Carl Wright’s personal assets by the liquidators of his company Cartel Client Review Ltd. The LinkedIN article had a link pointing to the Legal Beagles article on this same subject, where an advert for their new business venture LB Compare appears boldly on the right sidebar. Although Julian Siddle’s post appeared to be made with the intention of crediting Martyn Osment and ITUS, it was also a clever way to promote Legal Beagles and LB Compare.

We have already discussed that no credit has been given to those who made Legal Beagles what it is today, including the people who were instrumental in fighting the claims management companies here: No credit where credit is due. As if that wasn’t enough, the comments posted by a couple of members on Julian’s LinkedIN page were swiftly deleted. Deleted from the LinkedIN post but they can be seen right here on this page.

A little background

For those who don’t know what we’re talking about, Cartel Client Review was one of the best known claims management companies that made a lot of money from people who paid up-front fees to have their debts allegedly written off. Mr Wright was banned by regulators in 2010 but carried on trading under various companies. Legal Beagles were actively involved in fighting against such companies on behalf of the consumer. Ironically these are the very same companies that are now being promoted by LB Compare to handle PPI reclaims which individuals can easily do themselves.

What’s next?

Mr Siddle has been busy blowing his own trumpet lately, little did he know some people out there would have the courage to post up on there, using their own names so there can be no mistake as to who they were. I’m sure he wasn’t expecting that, certainly not two years after The Mass Cull. Just when he thought it was safe to go outside without wearing a bullet-proof vest, he gets shot at. That should teach them that you can remove people from a forum but not from the online world.

You can run but you cannot hide

In the real world, it is possible to leave a job, move house, leave town, emigrate. It’s not always easy, in fact, it can be very hard, but it is possible. Not so in the online world. You could move to New Zealand and it wouldn’t make any difference. There’s only one LinkedIN, one Facebook, one internet wherever you are. You can’t decide to move to another internet to avoid the truth. Think about that, Mr Siddle and the rest of the Beagles.

You can delete the comments from LinkedIN or wherever they are posted but not from our own archives or this site. Everything that’s posted online is stored somewhere and can re-appear at any time, anywhere.

Deleted comments
I am really pleased that all my hard work with CMC’s on being the first one on LB to make contact with ITUS has now paid off. I always knew we would one day get Carl Wright banged to rights. It is just a pity a prison sentence has not yet been given but guess the severity of his frauds he will get put away so he cannot reap further rewards from the unsuspecting public again. This case and Client Connection as well as all the other CMC’s were stopped as soon as we found out of the scams of collecting large sums of money up front.Denise Silverstein
Many congratulations to Denise Silverstein and your team. Your hard work and perseverance were amazing to behold, and credit must go to Julian Siddle and the LB team for supporting you as fully as they did in what were extremely difficult circumstances for you. It is a great pity that the team that brought this particular piece of justice into being no longer exists, and there are many who mourn its untimely demise. “There is no limit to what a person can achieve if they are prepared to let others take the credit” – and Julian’s modest praise of the team shows his, as we all know how instrumental he was in bringing this about.Bill Knight
Very best wishes to Julian and the current LBCompare team in their new venture, and of course we all hope that LBCompare will continue successfully in this fight against the many corrupt CMC’s and unscrupulous Law firms that stalk our otherwise green and pleasant land. The truth will always out, and I have every confidence that it will do so for LBCompare.Bill Knight
Jullian Siddle was not even involved in the early days when I discovered how the CMC’s were ripping off Britain’s unsuspecting public, in fact he was not involved or throughout that time. The person who was around was Nick Spooner who helped me tremendously with the big fight against the unscrupulous CMC’s, but I did the hard core work. Sometimes working throughout the night to prepare for the MOJ meetings. I was thrown out the LB site after giving many hours of help to posters who had been scammed. Now Legal Beagles are now offering a LB compare site recommending CMC’s which now I know why they did not want me there anymore and I am extremely angry.Denise Silverstein
I repeat my congratulations to you, Denise and apologise if my words may not have been as clear as yours. Julian Siddle’s support for your LB team’s work was clearly non-existent, but of course he still deserves full credit for whatever he did do – which he so modestly keeps to himself. Another icon of modesty is of course Nick Spooner, and I think it is good that you give him the credit he is due.

It is now well known that – like yourself – a number of core volunteer contributors were unceremoniously dumped by Legal Beagles with no reason given, and I can now understand your anger. It appears that LBCompare’s new modus operandi of recommending CMC’s goes against all that they previously stood for as a consumer help forum. As gamekeepers-turned-poachers, the independence and trustworthiness of their advice is now clearly in need of scrutiny – as are their motives. Bill Knight

 

41 Comments

  1. Dignity says:

    So who owns the Beagles?

    Contrary to the popular belief the main person behind ot is Nick Spooner.

    People like seeing women in charge but in this case Kate and Shazza are practically fronting the site while all real decisions are made by Mr Spooner.

    He may not be involved with day yo day running but he is the main oerson.

    • Legaleaglet says:

      Kate fronting the site? You hardly ever see her around these days, it’s been over two years since she was active on Legal Beagles. These days it’s in Shazza’s “capable” hands, with a little help from her friends Nemesis & Co. Not much help, more like a hindrance really, but that’s what’s left after everyone else got banned.

      As for Nick, the publicly available info from Companies House seems to indicate otherwise. The annual return shows him with just 10 shares while the other two own 95 shares each: http://www.nullrefer.com/?https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/09220332/filing-history

  2. Dignity says:

    Whose money is keeping the site going?

    I believe that some investors have been silly enough to invest in LB Compare. Only time will tell if they actually see any returns.

    • Legaleaglet says:

      The running costs have probably been covered with the VIP subs.

      No idea why they’d need £350k to set up a website, I guess that money is probably going to be used for advertising and marketing, which is the easiest way to burn a lot of money in very little time if one isn’t careful.

  3. BillK says:

    Marching sing-along time, now. “Well I don’t know, but I’ve been told….”
    “All that glisters is not gold.”
    Company……HALT !!!

    It does rather look as though the value of LB is not in what has been declared to Companies House – but what favour they can curry with the Spooner Empire if it is old Nick who holds the purse strings. Well, I guess that either he or whoever other investors there may be will shortly find out that the Beagles have sold them a pup !!!

    FWIW, I suspect that the LBCompare idea was probably stolen from a clever crackpot who thought he could run LB single-handed and actually tried to take it over by very devious means. Someone EVENTUALLY managed to get Cel to admit that this ‘Despicable Me’ guy might actually have been too clever for her, and he FINALLY got booted out. “There’s none so deaf as them wot won’t listen” – ain’t that right, Cel ?

    As we all know, there is no honour among thieves and – being the solid upstanding citizens that they are – the LB gang still went ahead with his idea, because they really still thought he was that clever. So, after he had got the idea up and running for them – and had got those who might question its ‘do-ability’ duly slung off the site – he was then jettisoned himself with nary so much as a “Thank you, and good night !” The rest of the lunatics then continued trying to run the crumbling asylum they which had created for themselves through their own avarice.

    “If the idea comes to you that you’re going to have a wreck in a truck and someone comes along and offers you a ride in a truck, then do not accept it.”
    ― James Redfield, The Celestine Prophecy“

    LBCompare might have seemed like a ‘Ride in the park’ for rogue CMC’s and other sharks to find more victims – but those with any sense will see it as a ride in a truck. Cel and the gang – you were warned, but you heeded not and killed the messengers. Karma seems to be taking its natural course, however, and the universe is unfolding as it should. “Ain’t that right, Godber ?”

    • Legaleaglet says:

      Most appropriate, especially since you are quoting from the Celestine Prophecy, isn’t that where Kate’s chosen user name comes from?

      LB Compare didn’t seem such a bad idea when the advert first appeared on Facebook at around Christmas time, and it related only to legal services. We all know there are times when we need professional help above and beyond what can be offered on a forum. Would you want your will drafted by Nemesis? If you got a claim for more than a few hundred quid, would you really place your trust on someone who doesn’t even read the thread before replying, let alone check the relevant bit of legislation or case law?

      The problem is that legal services are not easy to compare in the same way as, say, insurance or bank accounts. But that’s not our main concern. Are you saying someone came up with the idea of a comparison site involving CMCs and debt management companies even at the time Legal Beagles were actively fighting against them?

  4. revenge says:

    Well said Bill.

    It does seem very weird to me that they profess to have turned down £7m for the site and now accepted £350k for their compare site I cannot believe that either figure is near to the truth. If they were to have been offered £7m they would have taken the money and ran.

    I have not seen any advertising as yet in the mainstream media so they are only relying on people visiting LB as numbers may now be dwindling it is not going to boost too much income.

    • Legaleaglet says:

      As I said on this post: What’s in a number, the figures just don’t add up. First the site was apparently worth £35m in 2013 when it had only half the members and no compari$on $ite in sight, then it was worth just a fifth of that when it had twice as many members AND a baby compari$on $ite attached to it, only they decided to settle for just one twentieth of that figure (and one hundredth of the original £35m) from investors instead.

      Presumably the prospective buyers were just going to pay £35m or £7m for the site as it was and then make their own arrangements to ensure ongoing profitability, while these investors will be expecting a ROI from the Beagles.

  5. Jon says:

    Comparing legal services really is very difficult particularly if you are looking at legal aid or pro bono work. We probably all know of solicitors that have bad reputations, I certainly do but if they are as bad as that then surely they will just get people to give them glowing reviews.
    Not only that but there are more and more ‘legal representatives’ working out there who are not solicitors or barristers , some do not even have a law degree. There was a local one to me that cancelled my appointment more often than the NHS cancel operations and they were recommended by CAB. For some reason CAB thought they were qualified solicitors, no idea if it was misunderstanding or misrepresentation , anyway they do not get referrals from them any more .
    Anyway, even if someone has a law degree that does not make them an expert , it might give them knowledge in a few areas but I would want someone who has a reputation in that field.
    If I were rich and wanted a will writing, I would not go to a ‘will writer’ but to a wills and probate solicitor – I’m lucky I know two

    As for LB, it is on life support , even Nem posts less than he did , odd that now he has no one to compete against or to correct him he is fading from the limelight

    • Legaleaglet says:

      Comparing legal services really is very difficult particularly if you are looking at legal aid or pro bono work. We probably all know of solicitors that have bad reputations, I certainly do but if they are as bad as that then surely they will just get people to give them glowing reviews.

      When it comes to civil matters, legal aid is very restricted these days and I don’t think LB get involved in criminal practice. There are solicitors who do pro bono work but that would normally be through academic institutions and law clinics which wouldn’t participate in a comparison site.

      Not only that but there are more and more ‘legal representatives’ working out there who are not solicitors or barristers , some do not even have a law degree. There was a local one to me that cancelled my appointment more often than the NHS cancel operations and they were recommended by CAB. For some reason CAB thought they were qualified solicitors, no idea if it was misunderstanding or misrepresentation , anyway they do not get referrals from them any more .

      Legal advice in itself is not a reserved activity and neither are a lot of other legal services so it is possible for people without these qualifications to offer those services. There are also a number of ABS where solicitors partner with non-solicitors. It’s not clear whether LB Compare will only deal with law firms and sole practitioners or whether they would feature any provider of legal services.

      Anyway, even if someone has a law degree that does not make them an expert , it might give them knowledge in a few areas but I would want someone who has a reputation in that field.

      A law degree is a foundation, the actual expertise has to be built on top of that. Academic law education tends to be very theoretical, meaning people graduate knowing all about Roman Law, Common Law, Equity and the Courts of Assize but wouldn’t know where to start if they got a default CCJ. Practical knowledge is what’s required to solve real world problems, and lawyers specialise in a certain practice area. You wouldn’t consult an oncologist for a heart problem, nor can an employment lawyer do a very good job if you are charged with murder.

      If I were rich and wanted a will writing, I would not go to a ‘will writer’ but to a wills and probate solicitor – I’m lucky I know two

      You don’t need to be a lawyer to be a will writer, I also know one or two who are not. There’s also an ocean of difference between a generic will leaving everything to your children and a small legacy to the local donkey sanctuary and a contentious probate case. The two cannot be compared.

      As for LB, it is on life support , even Nem posts less than he did , odd that now he has no one to compete against or to correct him he is fading from the limelight

      That can only be a good thing, given how he mixes up consumer credit, employment and family law. If you relied on his advice, you could start with an employment problem and end up charged with murder!

      • Fair Play says:

        There are solicitors who do pro bono work but that would normally be through academic institutions and law clinics which wouldn’t participate in a comparison site.

        Oh yes, I know at least one who offered to do pro bono work for LB members, privately. LB didn’t like that one bit. Now it’s clear why that was.

  6. BillK says:

    Replying to an earlier comment from LegalEaglet (soz – I haven’t worked out how to do quotes in here) – who said:-
    “… you are quoting from the Celestine Prophecy, isn’t that where Kate’s chosen user name comes from? ”

    Yes, Kate told me that she modelled a lot of her life philosophies on The Celestine Prophecy.’ I’m not sure that I would care to put much trust in someone whose philosophies are based upon a 1993 American novel – even though it was a best-seller at the time. Its author thought he could make even more loadsamoney by making a film of it, but it flopped miserably. I guess his synchronicity was a bit out of kilter, as he didn’t see that dodgy truck coming !!! He can be seen preaching here these days: http://www.nullrefer.com/?http://www.celestinevision.com/

    LegalEaglet said: ” Are you saying someone came up with the idea of a comparison site involving CMCs and debt management companies even at the time Legal Beagles were actively fighting against them? ”

    I believe that is so, LE. There were odd goings-on after Amethyst & Tools returned from their long absence from LB, where Ame was busy deleting data so frantically in the background, that it ‘leaked out’ into the main forum. One particular LB member was clearly influencing Celestine’s judgement, and appeared to have found out how to delete posts he didn’t like – just like ‘PC Savage’ aka Tools. When Sapphire tried to investigate this ‘anomaly,’ she was immediately relieved of her duties as Site Admin. She was clearly about to uncover something that the site owners didn’t think she would find – and didn’t want her to find. When Celestine took up her short-lived post at Howlett-Clarke, she was already suggesting that there should be links between HC & LB – and LB members were already voicing their concerns at her motives. This, I am sure, was at a time when LB were still actively engaging with the MoJ & TSO et al regarding CMC’s & DMC’s etc. I eventually took them to task in the open forum around the end of February 2014, and by early March I had been shown the exit simply for asking for some truthful answers to simple questions. Revenge will probably have a better idea of the timing, but I would think that the Carl Wright debácle was still raging – and there would have been other cases that the LB team were actively working on, I am sure.

    • Legaleaglet says:

      That all seems to tie in then, the idea of monetising the site and removing anything that may go against that aim. If Kate was working for HC it would be fair enough to refer people there, the devil you know and all that… Yet very few cases seem to have been referred, at least not the ones posted on the forum if they had been, they would have gone quiet, you can’t have a firm acting for you and still be receiving amateur advice on the forum. It was mostly SDs that got referred, they didn’t seem interested even in fast-track cases which were left in the hands of Shaz to sort out, before Their Nemesis came to “the rescue”.

      Ironically, the person whose idea it may have been to set up a comparison site, was also removed at the time of the Mass Cull, no doubt intended as a way to dispose of those who may have some questions to ask. Sapphire would have been doomed from the start, as she could have argued that the site wouldn’t have been what it was had it not been for her running it all those years. Tuttsi could also have posed a problem to them if they wanted to work with CMCs so she also had to go.

  7. revenge says:

    Very true Bill, we were still active with the MOJ and CMC’s. Once I was banned the CMC thread died a complete death although the sticky threads I posted up regarding CMC’s were view by many thousands. So my work was still bringing in the many peeps looking at the MOJ rules etc.

    I remember Shazza in VIP chat box requesting that I deleted some of my sticky threads just before the cull as they needed to reduce the some of the space. I could not reduce anything as everything posted was important and since I was in charge of that forum I really did not want to delete anything. But suspect Shazza may have deleted posts after I was booted out.

    It does appear that at the time Shazza came back things were drastically changing and that ideas and running of the site would be done Shazza’s way or the highway. So this would definitely when they started planning the compare site as it stands to reason that a compare site on CMC’s we would not have to help people anymore who have been scammed. Also, the CMC thread was always top it fell completely off the top ten after my departure.

    • Legaleaglet says:

      I remember Shazza in VIP chat box requesting that I deleted some of my sticky threads just before the cull as they needed to reduce the some of the space.

      What a coincidence, uh? Why would they need to reduce the space? If they are worth £35m or even £7m, surely they can buy more server space. If you expect your site to grow, you have to be prepared to do this anyway. If they wanted to reduce space they could have removed old threads started by OPs who never went back since 2007. In fact, plain text takes up very little server space. A single image attachment can take up more space than a number of text threads so that was a rather flimsy excuse to get rid of content they just didn’t want to have on there.

      Also, the CMC thread was always top it fell completely off the top ten after my departure.

      That was to be expected, there was hardly anyone posting about it after the Cull and the same has happened to other LB areas that used to be the most active, such as bailiffs, which is now a ghost town, PPI, another ghost town since Bill-K was also banned. PlanB used to post on housing and repossessions, also banned in the Mass Cull, all those areas have dropped off the LB radar.

      Now we have LB Compare, it all starts to make sense again. If you want to reclaim PPI, you could be discreetly referred over to LB Compare where you’ll find a friendly CMC to help you. If you have a debt problem, why not try one of the many DMCs who charge up to 50% of your payments in fees?

  8. BillK says:

    We can indeed see the extent to which your stickies were viewed from the screenshot that was posted here earlier, revenge. If Shaz was indeed in the process of ‘dismantling’ the LB forum to make way for LBCompare, then I guess the CMC/MoJ section would have been the primary target. Assuming that to be the case, then I do find it amusing that whilst Ame wanted to remove records of LB’s action and advice against CMC’s in order to make LBCompare more inviting to her target ‘market,’ the dumb communications expert was busy bragging openly about LB’s part in the downfall of Carl Wright’s empire – something which he at least has finally realised was a mistake ! It’s bad enough to know that they can’t handle the truth – but they can’t even handle falsehood.

    “That’s ANOTHER fine mess you’ve gotten us into, Stanley…” Er, I mean Julian.

    • Legaleaglet says:

      LB Compare is still only in its infancy and fed off the forum, which will have been thoroughly indexed by Google. People looking to reclaim will find LB and from there, they can be directed to LB Compare. They don’t want to remove too much from LB. No doubt the idea is to suggest that only reputable companies will be featured on LB Compare and there will be ratings and reviews. The likes of Cartel wouldn’t be welcome.

      Let’s not forget the Beagles love the camera and to be featured in the media and can’t resist bragging about it.

  9. Interested Party says:

    Let’s not forget the Beagles love the camera and to be featured in the media and can’t resist bragging about it.

    That’s true, but some also like to run and hide when the pressure arrives…..
    Kate goes missing until the problem disappears
    Julian says he’s busy at work and when the problem is solved he will claim that it was all his own work
    Sharon will obsess and spend all her time on the problem, sometimes spending so much time on it that LB will go by the wayside.
    That leaves Enaid, who by her own admission is only on there because she’s nosey
    Nemesis …. well enough said about him
    and poor Kati who really cannot be aware of what they really are like.
    Lastly you have Nick Spooner who nice as he is, actually is more like a bad parent who instead of spending time with the children he just throws money at them in order to shut them up or in his case runs to an expensive lawyer in London

    • Legaleaglet says:

      Kate goes missing until the problem disappears

      …then reappears for the photo opportunity.

      Julian says he’s busy at work and when the problem is solved he will claim that it was all his own work

      …as he did here: Blowing his own trumpet, Where he did give credit to fellow Beagles, but only those who are Site Team members, even when others also spent the year posting and making it all possible.

      Sharon will obsess and spend all her time on the problem, sometimes spending so much time on it that LB will go by the wayside.

      Indeed, while she concentrated on the fake passports site issue which was bound to attract fame and publicity, she left the site in Her Nemesis‘ [in]capable hands.

      That leaves Enaid, who by her own admission is only on there because she’s nosey

      She hardly ever posts and couldn’t organise the proverbial piss-up in a brewery! Or run a bath, let alone LB.

      Nemesis …. well enough said about him

      Shaz left the site in his hands, oh dear, that is truly worrying! A lot can be said about him: Their Nemesis Part II.

      and poor Kati who really cannot be aware of what they really are like.

      Nope! Like all the others before her: Unsung heroes (Sapphire, Tuttsi, Amy, etc.), she probably thinks they are her best friends.

      Lastly you have Nick Spooner who nice as he is, actually is more like a bad parent who instead of spending time with the children he just throws money at them in order to shut them up or in his case runs to an expensive lawyer in London

      Expensive London lawyers don’t add anything to the site, they are just for emergency intervention which could have been nipped in the bud.

  10. BillK says:

    Well, the Allsorts have been a bit quiet’ for the past couple of days to give Sharon time to finish frantically gathering up the comments here and the necessary You-Tube clips to formulate her now famous silent issue-dodging response – dumbly assisted of course by the ex-Ministry of Truth Grand Legal Beagles Communications & Policy wallah.

    But after graciously allowing them some time to catch-up in between fabricating spoof reviews and posts to fool the punters they clearly despise as much as their volunteer contributors – their absence in a forum that actually seeks the truth continues to speak volumes. Whilst Kate & Nick put their tin hats on and shelter under a stone – Sharon & Jules “Hear no evil, see no evil & speak no evil.” OK., it’s cold outside, but not that cold that the brass monkeys have lost their nuts, surely – and haven’t got the balls to comment with their version of the truth in a forum that actually seeks the truth instead of deleting it ?

    Will they comment ? Will they ‘eck as like – as they say oop Mansfield way.

    By way of a laxative, perhaps – over the last few days the Allsorts have located a ‘Rachel Wilson’ who – suffice it to say – appears to know a few things that might be of interest to Sharon. Very probably to others, it should be said. However, now is probably not the time and place to go into detail. Best left to cool down, so the dish can be served cold, methinks.

Leave a Reply

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