Second Anniversary of the Mass Cull 2014


This last week marked the second anniversary of the Mass Cull of 2014, which started one Saturday night, on February 23 2014. The carnage started rather unexpectedly, after a member who had caused a bit of controversy on Legal Beagles made a comeback.

Prelude to the carnage

Although very sudden in appearance, there is no doubt that this had been brewing for some time. Perhaps the first indication that all was not well was when Sapphire, who, as we all know, had been running the site for six years, was demoted by text. This happened a few months earlier, around September 2013 when everything started to change on the forum and Sharon was pretty much in charge by then. Curly Ben also got demoted for aiding and abetting, and he decided that the only way was out, so he deactivated himself and walked away, never to be seen again. The demotion had been related to the same member who had been absent from the forum for three months. The Beagles’ judgment had been questioned a number of times over this issue. We are not here to discuss the member in question as that is well beyond the scope of this blog.

The first Beagle to get hit was Clever Clogs, who had allegedly posted up something inappropriate. A couple of long-term Beagles rallied behind him, one of them Teaboy, who also ended up banned, albeit only temporarily. Clever Clogs was not actually banned at this stage since he was still able to access the chatbox, even though his VIP status had been revoked. It was all rather strange. This was followed by Sapphire’s sudden disappearance from the Site Team Roll of Honour in the sidebar. Sapphire had already been demoted from admin the previous year but she remained a part of the Site Team, until now.

Dropping like flies

Things started to unfold even further on Feb 25th, when, following Sapphy’s disappearance, PlanB suddenly got put on moderation and later that night, she was banned without being given a reason or an explanation. Next thing you know, Sapphire and Clever Clogs were fully banned, also without being told why.

The morning after, Inca, who was away on holiday in an area with sporadic internet access, woke up to find herself banned, without even having a clue as to what was going on. Once more, no reason was given. Tuttsi, who had been working personally with the LB owners on various projects since 2007 swiftly followed. At this point there were six banned members and not a single reason given for the Mass Cull.

The two lady Beagles had been sending each other kisses in chatbox and seemed very happy. No doubt they had achieved something they’d been wanting to do for a long time, yet nobody knew WHY.

Another one bites the dust

It’s the 1st of March, Spring is in the air and it’s been a full week since the site clearout took place. As is customary in Beagleland, there was no sign of anything out of the ordinary. The Banned Beagles all had their banned avatars replaced with “Rotweiller”, no doubt to avoid questions being asked. Nobody dared ask any questions and you can see why. Well, almost nobody, but we’ll get back to that in a moment. Sometime in the afternoon of March 1st, another beagle was turned into a rotweiller: Flaming Parrot. Once more, no reason was given.

Restoration project

With most of the regular contributors eliminated, the Beagles worked hard at restoring normality to the site and keeping the pretence that nothing happened and did their best to show that banning all those “rotweillers” had not caused the site any harm. Sharon was posting like the Duracell Bunny on speed. Teaboy got reinstated after being told he had been banned apparently by mistake. A couple of weeks later, Flaming Parrot also made a reappearance, first as a “Senior Member” or something like that which suggested they were no longer VIP, although later on FP was back as a VIP.

Cat among the pigeons

We have previously stated that the site was eerily quiet after the clearout and nobody wanted to ask any questions in case they too, felt the full weight of the axe. As ever, the exception confirms the rule, in this case the exception came in the shape of Bill-K, another long-term contributor who had been on Legal Beagles since its inception in 2007 and who had helped hundreds, if not thousands of people with his clever spreadsheets, designed to ensure people get the maximum redress they were entitled to when reclaiming PPI. At this point in time, he was almost the only one left in the Beagles PPI Forum. He decided to do what no-one else had done so far: ask the LB Management a few questions. As expected, this didn’t go down well and, you guessed it: down came the guillotine. Welcome to the Ban Club, Bill. You won’t be the last!


  1. enaid says:

    I can not recall any comment about a forum you set up and that’s the truth, be glad if you refresh my memory.
    Perhaps it was something that did not interest me at the time or now tbh.

    The question you asked, ‘I did nothing about what exactly’?

    I tell you what I was and that’s sick to the back teeth of all the bickering usually caused by people from other forums dragging their baggage and trouble s along instead of leaving them at the side door.
    These people seemed to thrive on stirring and weren’t happy until they caused problems on LB too.

    • Legaleaglet says:

      Wasn’t LB set up by a splinter group from CAG? All the founding members would have arrived there with baggage and it wasn’t exactly left at the door, was it?

      When you have 70,000 members, or even just 7,000, you’re going to have some with baggage, some with mental health issues, some with personality issues, some with dyslexia, some with an attitude… a good forum manager needs to know how to deal with all those people and the task can be overwhelming for just one or two people if they don’t want to delegate at least some of the functions.

      Whatever their issues, people who have given years of their lives to a site deserve the benefit of a chat and a discussion rather than just a permanent ban without so much as a bye or leave.

  2. grimreaper says:

    Well all I would say is to not rise to any further bait this silly woman spits out. It is clearly being primed, lit up and being sent over here. It has been stupid enough to fully admit that back stabbing and conniving that has and is still going on in those childish chat rooms and if you analyse carefully just about every issue raised by people here has been admitted and that from a site team member. In the last few days I have looked into the wills and bereavement area. What I read there really horrifies me. It would seem from the public domain information Enaid is one of their experts yet immediately has failed to establish the facts of the LPA (there are two types) before any other form of posting that has been made. Is it a LPA even? No advice at all on executors etc. Shane will lose.the lot if he follows them. It would seem that all of the REAL knowledge base has departed.

  3. enaid says:

    For your information I have not logged in to LB since Friday except when it came up on my phone when I went into safari I then deleted it. Something you can easily check if you go in my profile, so once again you should get your facts before you spout about me being primed.
    Nice you know who i am and can check up on me there you have the advantage as I don’t know you.

    I am no expert grimreaper and i am not a silly woman either. my knowledge of LPAs is basic as I have done both for my late dad and also just completed one for my MIL, so I do know there are 2 types.
    I did read up before I did the LPAs and actually they came back without a hitch, many are not and that includes those done by solicitors.
    Shane will lose what exactly? He had nothing to start with as all was left to the carer and if she renounced it, it went to charity.
    The LPA is of no consequence now as it ends when the donor dies. I was trying to find if one had actually been registered as the will writer did the LPA and the will at the same time. It has been known for LPAs to be filled in and charged for and never registered, naughty but a nice little earner for the not so legal , legal profession.

    • grimreaper says:

      Which LPA there are now two? You state in the singular. Secondly as regards Shane you are clearly not aware of the pitfalls of being an executor of an estate. There are legal responsibilities which need to be considered and some draconian penalties for failing in those obligations. There has been no discussion as to this “1 st” and “2nd” executor business. There is the possibility of JOINT executors and one usually takes the lead role and already there are glaring problems on that thread. There has been a solicitor who has walked away, someone who is actually not qualified is also involved which the Probate Court will not like, Bank accounts not frozen , the use of personal accounts etc. Not one item questioned to ascertain the real facts. All leaving the executors open to question and probable challenge if another relative turns up and claims that they have not had financial provision made for them. It goes on. I am no expert but am aware of a lot of it and can at least raise some of the questions to try and guide someone to get better advice and so on. LB Nothing. The reason I know any of this is that I am the joint executor with a highly qualified and experienced solicitor of what will be a very complex and potentially costly situation when the inevitable happens and I ain’t going to discuss that matter here. But I bothered to check up. So the advice to Shane is bad at the least. End of.

      Like I said LB bad mouthed me very badly, ridiculed me publicly, back stabbed me and slandered me behind closed doors and then called my parentage into question when all their wrongdoing fell into my hands. And that was all long before any this happened with these people on here. With whom I have had many serious differences BUT I would trust them a lot further than any of the current crop of highly suspect people on LB. I feel for the ordinary member who most of the time seemingly is being misled to feed some overgrown egos of a few. I will not comment further but just remember a previous comment of mine. Arguing with an idiot is like playing chess with a pigeon, the bird will shit on the board and then still strut around as if it has won. End of. Good bye Enaid I wish you well but I cannot be bothered to educate or even speak to you any more.

  4. BillK says:

    Enaid: “I can not recall any comment about a forum you set up and that’s the truth, be glad if you refresh my memory.”
    How convenient, Enaid. I already did refresh your memory just now – remember ?
    Enaid: “Perhaps it was something that did not interest me at the time or now tbh.”
    Oh – it sure did interest you – you were LIVID !!!
    Selective amnesia – affects all your ‘friends’ as well, it seems.

    Enaid: “The question you asked, ‘I did nothing about what exactly’?”
    Blimey – you ARE as bad as Nem ! Here is the question I asked:
    “Those whom you now considered as friends decided to ban me from LB simply because I asked for some honest answers – nothing more. You stood by and did nothing – so do tell me who did the back-stabbing there, and who did nothing about it ?”
    As LB Team, you would have known about it. If you didn’t, then you SHOULD have known about it. If you can’t answer that question, then either you were about as useless as many people seem to think you are – or you were being kept as much in the dark back then as you are now.

    Oh – do I hear water dripping ? You haven’t left the bath running AGAIN, have you ?

    Damned amnesia…

  5. enaid says:

    Still the same old nasty bill then, can’t resist an insult or two.
    As usual yer talking in riddles
    You refreshed my memory how and what was I livid about?
    jeez you talk about others not answering questions, think you are pretty good at that yerself lol

  6. Dignity says:

    Diane, I’m not sure what your point is but – unlike LB – we welcome everyone to post here and express their opinions.

  7. enaid says:

    I don’t think your idea of here is quite working, BillK is his usual nasty self and that is probably why he gets himself banned. I do not know about his forum although he insists I commented about it. When asking him to remind me the insults fly.
    Same with grimreaper lol i am a silly woman sent here primed, so untrue I came here, didn’t hide who i was and havent logged into LB since Friday as to keep the visit one from me personally and nothing to do with LB.
    Am not sorry I dropped by, I doubt I’ll be back, it just confirms what i originally thought and my point Dignity,to see for myself as i like to do rather than hear it through the grapevine,.

    • Legaleaglet says:

      As previously stated, everyone is allowed to post their opinions on here. That means anyone can post even if they are against “us” or the idea of this site, or in favour of Legal Beagles and their management. In fact, we have even extended an invitation to the LB owners/managers to put forward their side of the story. So far, they’ve not taken it up, but it’s still on the table.

      Your posts have not been edited or removed, neither have those made by Bill or GR. It’s equal opportunities for everyone regardless of which side you’re on. That’s what free speech is all about.

      Obviously if the posts crossed the line, they’d have to be edited or removed, just like someone who becomes abusive would get ejected from a restaurant or bar. As long as things are kept more or less civilised, everyone is allowed to express their opinions.

Leave a Reply

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