Spoof Posts

Sad as it is I have been watching LB quite closely of late and have seen a number of posts that start my bull **** detector going into overdrive. Now while I am sure that all forums get such posts I am wondering if these are being created for a reason, to generate posts and traffic maybe.
I understand that there is a whole range of problems out there and not all companies or organisations follow the rules. The general give aways seem to be
1) The OP gets defensive when asked a question, saying for example that it is all getting too complicated
2) The OP vanishes
3) The OP just glosses over particular points on several occasions
4) The facts just do not add up

Of course some of theses posts , spoof or not, may provide potentially good information that will aid others . It is also possible that the people writing them are just not that eloquent and feel they need to add to the question in order to get a response .
I suppose I am wondering if LB are so desperate for traffic that they have started a creative writing course behind the scenes.


  1. Legaleaglet says:

    It can be hard to tell when a poster is for real and when it’s a spoof. Some people enjoy starting spoof threads, no idea why but I know quite a few who do. That can happen anywhere and, from an admin’s perspective, it’s always best to give the OPs the benefit of the doubt in case they are genuine and just don’t know how to express themselves. Some people may feel intimidated and disappear.

    It’s a different story when the forum admins themselves set up spoof posts. I once read that one of the biggest and best known consumer forums started out with the owner “talking to himself” on spoof threads, intended to generate traffic and attract real posters. To clarify, the site in question was NOT Legal Beagles, just mentioned it because it does happen.

  2. BillK says:

    I have occasionally ‘popped back in’ to LB as a guest, but as I was looking to curtail my forum activity when it was nicely curtailed for me by dear old PC Savage, then I haven’t been looking that closely at how the old place is hobbling along. I certainly don’t have a sense of nostalgia about it !!!

    I learned over the years that many posters need a bit of patience and an attempt at understanding. Some are just not too good at gramer & speling – and deserve praise for venturing into a forum populated by wannabee Grammar Police and general wafflers such as myself. Others I have dealt with have initially come across as either ‘a bit thick’ or perhaps a bit aggressive – when eventually they turned out to be dyslexic, and they understood a helluva lot more than they let on !

    So giving benefit of the doubt does seem to be the best course, as you say, LE. And whilst doing that, one can also apply the various tests that you mention. In the end, if a poster does little to help the forum advisors in solving their problems, then they can expect little help in return – despite the advisors’ best efforts. There is only so much time and effort available from voluntary advisors and – with the best will in the world – they must allocate their time as efficiently as possible.

    From what I have read here since my departure from LB, the few remaining advisors are giving advice that could well be described as ‘spoof’ advice. My earlier attempts at discussing matters with LB’s inarticulate communications officer Tools and his colleague Amethyst resulted in replies to my questions in the form of You-Tube ‘mini-clips’ such as “We’re going to need a bigger boat” from ‘Jaws,’ and “You can’t handle the truth” from ‘A Few Good Men’ – such was their inability to answer my few simple questions by stringing some words together themselves.

    So it would not surprise me in the least if they have now honed their talents further, and actually worked out how to use the keyboard to generate the bovine excrement which they are now becoming so famous for. From what I have heard, Nem and Kati have been running out of steam lately – perhaps because they have finally realised that they are being taken for a ride in Celestine’s doomed truck – so I daresay Tools & co. are having to take the wheel by generating spoof posts to try and stay on the road.

    It ain’t happening, though, is it guys ?

    • Legaleaglet says:

      Google is nothing but a series of robots commonly known as spiders, hard-wired to index content based on keywords. The spiders can’t tell whether the advice is sound or not, they just index the text. For the purpose of boosting the numbers, it doesn’t matter where the content comes from, who posts it or how accurate it is. Prospective LB Compare participants are probably shown Google Analytics and internal forum stats which are all about the numbers as seen here: It’s a numbers game and Quantity over quality.

      I fully agree with your view that resources are limited and you can only help those who help themselves. Sometimes pressing the [ENTER] key can make all the difference, even if the spelling and grammar are poor, it’s much easier to read text that’s broken into a number of paragraphs. The use of mobile devices has only made matters much worse, some people only have a phone to access the internet with, and its not easy to type up the whole story using a tiny virtual keyboard.

      While it’s fair enough for help seekers to make posts that are not the easiest to read, riddled with typos and bad grammar and lacking in punctuation, those who regularly post in response to OP’s posts should really do better, especially if they call themselves “advisors” like Nemesis, whose canned, lazy and clearly copied and pasted responses are often less than helpful. Telling a new member who joined that day to “send a CPR request, you’ll find a template on the forum” without bothering to post a link is not helpful at all, he might as well post that in Greek, as it would make as much sense to the poster.

      Obviously the spoof “advisor” is the only one left on board who can make any sense of the court process after he managed to get all the others who posted up on those threads, banned, so all the poor punters have to rely on his and even Charity, who has mysteriously re-appeared, is now desperately seeking @nemesis, twice! What has LB come to? http://legalbeagles.info/forums/showthread.php?76347-Court-Claim-Lowell-Portfolio-I-LTD-Shopacheck-18-01-2016&p=616590#post616590

      The fact that the Communications Officer should have to resort to lines from old movies to convey a message says a lot about his ability to communicate! They probably need a bigger boat, how about the Titanic?

  3. Big Al says:

    Not LB I know, but there is a woman of a certain age who is notorious for creating spoof posts. Very weird.

    • Legaleaglet says:

      Perhaps the lady in question has a similar aim to the Beagles’ current aim, i.e. to promote her own bu$ine$$, albeit a totally separate one from LB Compare, as I don’t think the services she offers can be compared, there aren’t enough providers in what’s a rather niche market.

  4. Jon says:

    I must admit I am inclined to agree with bill and LE. What may make these posts more obvious is the general lack of fresh posts. It seems that a few months ago, hardly a day went by without a new post of I’ve received a claim what do I do. Now there seem many less and often they are appearing when the poster has apparently made some effort to send a cpr and a cca request off.

    What I also find perplexing is the complete ignorance of what to do should they produce an agreement. If we assume that many people got into trouble with the crash, and many will have struggled for some time with dmp,s etc it is not unreasonable to think many claims are still from pre 2007 agreements.

    The whole defence seems to be based on non compliance with s77/78 .,I am not sure if they would even know what to do with a claim where the agreement is UE.

    • Legaleaglet says:

      There are many fine points that can be used to defend a claim but you need some co-operation from the defendants. It can be frustrating when people just tell you they can’t remember anything: when they took out the card, when they last paid, what documents they received or didn’t receive in the past, etc. The devil is in the detail!

      There was an LB poster who won in court despite having received what appeared like a perfect loan agreement with all the prescribed terms on it, only he was able to argue that the figures quoted on that agreement did not tally with what his statements showed he’d been paying, so that couldn’t have been the agreement that applied to his account. It may have been an enforceable agreement but it wasn’t the one for his account and the DJ had to agree and dismissed the claimant’s case.

      As their Nemesis is now in charge of all the court claims after managing to get everyone else banned, it’s all centered around lack of documents which is the only argument he knows, and it’s hardly rocket science. If you issue a claim, you need to be prepared to evidence it. The timescale for a CCA request may well be 12 + 2 working days as he so aptly points out, however, they can still produce the document (or a suitable recon), right up to the time of the hearing (well, 14 days prior to it). What happens if they do?

      There have been cases stayed for months or even over a year because the claimants simply failed to respond to the defence. Then, a year later, they got their hands on the documents and applied to lift the stay. I know a couple of LB members who got summary judgment as a result. Their Nemesis wasn’t much help and neither were the rest of the Beagles but if anyone disagrees with their “system” (which invariably includes an auto-responder from Nemesis), you know what happens.

      Questions that deviate from the usual are too much for the old debt advisor with 40 years experience.

  5. Legaleaglet says:

    There is something not quite right about this one, I do hope it’s a spoof, or else the OP has made a mistake, otherwise I don’t wish to know what would happen to them, left in Nemesis’ less than capable hands: Is this for real?

Leave a Reply

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