On previous posts we have seen how Their Nemesis has been making extravagant claims with regards to his experience as a debt advisor. In fact, he’s been known to have said he has over 45 years experience. There is no way to know whether this is true or not, or is there? Prior to his glitzy debut on Legal Beagles, he was quite well known on another forum, the Consumer Action Group or CAG. He may well have told the Beagles that he was there as their resident debt advisor but his early posts paint a totally different picture.
There is nothing wrong with asking for advice and nor does anyone know all there is to know about a subject. It is also possible to learn quite a lot in five or six years, in fact, your average degree takes just half that time. However, when someone claims to have over 40 years experience as debt advisors, you wonder WHY they would be posting on forums asking for advice on rather basic points. If he was helping people deal with their debts all these years, WHY would he need to go and post on CAG asking for advice dealing with his own family’s debt issues?
Here is one of his early CAG posts, asking about a Welcome credit agreement. It also shows that, as a debt advisor, he did a rather poor job with his own nearest and dearest.
Nearly a month earlier, he had posted the following.
Note the reference to contacting creditors on behalf of people he was trying to help. This raises the question of whether he held a Consumer Credit License with the OFT at the time, to provide debt counselling services. One thing is to post up on forums, or to informally advice your own family and friends, another is to contact creditors on other people’s behalf. In fact, that’s likely to go beyond just debt counselling and into debt adjusting territory.
As for reporting them to the police, since when is doing credit searches a criminal offence? Picture this old Army Dog walking into his local police station, saying he’s there to report a crime, then going on to say that Lowell and McKenzie Hall have been harassing him. The police would probable send him over to the CAB to get advice with his debts before he can even say all they’ve done is search his credit files.
That goes to show how much he knew about not just dealing with debt but the law in general. For a start, the difference between civil and criminal matters seems totally lost on him. There have been cases where the debtor has won in court on the basis of having been subjected to harassment from creditors, but this was a civil action and the remedy was damages, not a criminal prosecution involving the police. The debtors in question received 100s of phone calls, which intrude into your daily life.
His extensive legal knowledge becomes obvious on his next post, where he has a senior moment:
First it’s harassment and a matter for the police, then it’s defamation and libel with the county court. His argument is that they did a search for certain keywords. So if someone googles “child porn”, does that mean Google can take action for defamation and libel, because they can be seen to be involved in an illegal activity as a result of this search? Get real!
Here we have a rather simple definition. The article was updated in 2008 and would have been relevant at the time the post above was made in 2010.
Any disparaging statement made by one person about another, which is communicated or “published,” may well be a defamatory statement and can give rise to an action for either libel or slander in English law.
Note the words “communicated or published”. Clearly a credit search is not communicated or published.
The same web page goes on to provide a definition of publication:
Publication, for the purposes of defamation, requires communication to a third person. That third person must actually become aware of the defamatory material.
If no third person knew that Briggy was being suspected of having outstanding debts, then there was no publication, therefore no defamation.
It should be noted that the above article pre-dates the Defamation Act 2013 but we are dealing with posts made back in 2010.
For someone who claims to be very clued up on legal issues, he wasn’t aware that defamation claims cannot be brought in the county court.
The County Courts Act 1984 says the following:
(2)A county court shall not, except as in this Act provided, have jurisdiction to hear and determine—
(a). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(b)any action in which the title to any toll, fair, market or franchise is in question; or
(c)any action for libel of slander.
As can be seen, this would also have been the case back in 2010.
He then goes on to write his own “threatogram” saying he’s “taken advice”. What sort of advice was that, where they told him to ask for £5k and neglected to mention the lack of jurisdiction of the County Court? What financial loss?
If he had any legal knowledge himself or had really sought advice, he would have been told that he would have to write a proper letter of claim in accordance with the Pre-action Protocol for Defamation. The actual wording of the protocol may have changed since 2010 but the protocol itself has been in force since 2000.
So far, we’ve seen that:
Let’s not forget that, back then, he would already have had nearly 40 years’ worth of debt advice under his belt, if his claims are to be believed.
Later on he starts to brag about having been “paid”, although he doesn’t say how much. We all know if he’d had as much as £1,000, let alone £5,000, he’d have posted about it, so we can only assume he may have got $50 or thereabouts to shut him up. Later on, he puts up the post below:
Note he says he’s got “expert contacts to draw on”. If so, WHY was he posting on CAG, asking for help? WHY didn’t he go and approach his expert contacts to start with? He could have done so and then just posted up a summary of the results on CAG.
The final paragraph says he had what could be called a combined net gain of £31,000 since joining CAG. This was as at July 20th 2010, he joined CAG on May 30th 2010. This must be one for the Guinness Book of Records! In less than two months, he manged to get that much money written off or reclaimed! Anyone who’s attempted a reclaim will know the process takes much longer and, even when you succeed in having a debt written off, it doesn’t happen overnight either.
On his CAG profile, he claimed to have a PhD and a law degree! How are we to believe such claims when even a first year law student would know the following:
At some point during the course of that thread, Brigadier 1JCS “died” (shot down in flames perhaps?) and Brigadier2JCS was born, his date of birth being the 15th of August 2010. This is rather odd, since there isn’t any significant change in usernames and anyone would recognise him as the same poster. What’s interesting is that the new profile doesn’t make any of the claims he made during Briggy’s first and rather short, life on CAG.
Below is the profile of the New Brig born in August 2010 seen against the Old Brig.
Note how he’s lost all his lustre. He is now only semi-retired and busier than ever, he no longer mentions the MoD or his PhD and LLB. Most interesting, isn’t it?