Their Nemesis Part II

Nemesis letters

Having seen some very interesting comments posted on the main Nemesis page, we now know the full history about his demise from CAG, down to the fact that the CAG site team ended up telling people not to use his templates. The Legal Beagles Team are obviously not bothered about it, as long as they have him around, always ready and willing. It looks like they are happy to let him draft stuff despite previous incidents where he drafted completely the wrong thing.

Lethal weapon

Soldiers and people in the armed forces are known for using lethal weapons, that’s what they’re trained for. In this case, we have a retired army character who uses a different kind of lethal weapon now he’s on civvy street: his letters! After the CAG site team advised all their members (and there’s hundreds of thousands of them), not to use his letters, the Beagles seem happy to let him draft away, even when there were some instances where his letters didn’t do the OPs much good.

I guess it just looks good to have someone on board nearly 24/7 offering to draft things left, right and centre for the poor punters who don’t know any better.

JD Williams and Lowell

Court claim received

53 Comments

  1. peterbard says:

    Just had a look at this. I think someone needs to jump in here. Nemisis insists that this is a civil matter because it is debt, but the issue is not the debt, it is the fraudulent withdrawal of funds by an unauthorised party . This is most certainly contrary to the fraud act and is criminal. I am not saying that the police would pursue this but they could, especially if the creditor JBW made complaint. Secondly why is the poster writing to Lowell they have just bought the terminated account. The debtor cannot transfer liability for the debt to another party you cannot assign liabilities in law, they may undertake an informal agreement but I doubt very much they will interfere with the credit report unless formal complaint is made to the authorities. Why is no one else commenting.

    • BannedBeagle says:

      Just had a look at this. I think someone needs to jump in here.

      We would… if we weren’t banned!

    • Legaleaglet says:

      Reading that thread, it seems to be all about a default on his credit report rather than being pursued for the debt. It also says that the lady in question is in poor health and has had strokes, etc. Is she in a position to make such a statement? Is it fair for her to be subjected to potential criminal action for the sake of an entry on her son’s credit report? Lowell have reported correctly to the CRA since the debt was incurred in son’s name.

      A formal complaint in this case would have to involve the police and would you report your own mum, in poor health, to the police over £185? Being a criminal matter, having a signed confession would mean a guilty plea and result in a criminal conviction, a criminal record against her and potentially a Magistrates’ Court fine against the lady. I wouldn’t even go there and I do question her capacity.

  2. Interested Party says:

    Nemesis is the only regular poster on there, his advice may not be good but at least he posts. The site owners are no where to be seen at times and either are not interested or don’t care. All this is apparent when you see the amount of unanswered posts there are from newbies desperate for help. The site that cares ….. absolutely not.

    • Legaleaglet says:

      Nemesis is the only regular poster on there, his advice may not be good but at least he posts. The site owners are no where to be seen at times and either are not interested or don’t care. All this is apparent when you see the amount of unanswered posts there are from newbies desperate for help. The site that cares ….. absolutely not.

      Well, they banned FP who was the one who posted the most, are you familiar with boardreader? FP was usually top poster every week. They also banned a number of people who used to post on the same threads as him: Jon1965, Berniethebolt and Roland. They had one clearout in 2014 and another in 2015. Nemesis was booted out of CAG and the CAGgers told not to use his letters, yet LB let him have the run of the site. The site that cares? yeah right!

  3. Interested Party says:

    Wonder who will be in the 2016 kicked out group ?

    • Legaleaglet says:

      There’s hardly any regulars left, they turned a nice little community into a half-baked legal advice centre. If anyone should go, it should be Nemesis of course, but who else would spend all day repeating the same things over and over again?

      • BannedBeagle says:

        Just had a look and that place could be organised much better. Looks like they are in a bit of a pickle now they’ve cleared out the room and the old soldier isn’t well enough to hold the fort.

  4. Interested Party says:

    Don’t forget K.K.K.Kati

    • Legaleaglet says:

      Kati seems like a nice lady but no idea what she’s doing there, other than acting as Nemesis secretary, or should it be Executive Assistant? Nah, because he’s hardly an executive.

  5. Dark Shadow says:

    It seems to me that the ‘alleged’ owners are leaving the answering of threads to a certain couple of users. Nemesis who purports to have 40 years experience (where’s the proof) and Kati who by her own admission has no experience whatsoever.
    There is a case ongoing right now where a member has asked for help and Nemesis is preparing legal letters etc with the help of Kati for this poor gentleman who has already been to court a couple of times over a caravan. This man needs real legal help, not an armchair lawyer who copies and pastes information all the time.
    It has come to light that despite many messages to the owners and their resident legal person many of the users cries for help are being ignored, could this be because a) they won’t ‘earn’ them any money or b) there’s not much kudos in it as we all know they all love a bit of publicity, sadly though at the moment the only publicity they are getting is of the bad type.
    One day some poor person is going to end up in court, relying on the letters/documents supplied by an untrained armchair lawyer, they will lose everything and will have no redress because the site owners have let their members down badly.
    How sad.

    • Legaleaglet says:

      Nemesis’ shortcomings have been brought to the owners’ attention several times, by a number of people. It is my understanding all have been banned. One thing they don’t like is to have their judgment questioned by mere mortals, I believe a similar situation was behind the Mass Cull two years ago. At that time one of the arguments was that the victims of the cull did not have any legal expertise to share, which was, of course, untrue, yet they made Kati, who didn’t have any legal expertise either, Site Team. She tries her best to help but there’s a big difference between performing admin tasks and drafting legal documents and letters.

      Nemesis was removed from CAG after he was reported to their Site Team for giving the wrong advice while making it sound like he was an experienced advisor dealing with “cases” all the time. Sadly it looks like CAG have a lot more sense than Legal Beagles.

      He has also posted on LB about the private debt cases he handles. Debt advice is a regulated activity that requires FCA authorisation yet there’s no indication that he is so authorised.

      • Dark Shadow says:

        You mentioned the Mass Cull, I’ve heard tell that a certain man who throws funds at LB stated that those who were culled did not contribute and were there to gossip only.
        Well here’s news for him, it was those ‘gossipers’ who kept that site ticking over, not his precious girlfriends, all they ever did was hide away and come out when there was an opportunity to get their names or faces in the papers, or get a job at Howlett Clarke that didn’t last the distance.
        Well done money man, you got that one wrong didn’t you.

        • Legaleaglet says:

          Gossip, uh? And what exactly do the girlfriends in question do all day in the site team area? So many times you’d see them online just “Viewing thread” and not posting anywhere visible. A forum, like any other community, is likely to generate a certain amount of gossip. Nothing wrong with that as long as it’s not malicious and no-one gets hurt!

    • Fair Play says:

      It has been brought to my attention that someone got banned because they referred people to a solicitor who was able to help them. This was done after the site’s resident legal professionals had been unable to help a number of people who had court claims, some of these claims were over £10,000 and would have gone to the fast track, there were some high enough to go to the multi track.

      For those not familiar with court procedure, the main difference is that, in the small claims track, the court does not have the power to award costs against the party who loses the case, save in exceptional circumstances. In the fast track and multi track, the court routinely orders the party who loses, whether it’s the claimant or the defendant, to pay the costs of the party who wins. Litigation is expensive and costs can mount up and end up as high as the claim itself, or even higher, and the average LIP wouldn’t know the first thing about costs assessment or challenging costs orders.

      Posters with high value claims were being left in Nemesis’ hands, who approached the claims in the same way as small claims, relying entirely on claimants not being able to evidence their case, a situation that can change at any time. At no point were those posters being warned about the possibility of costs against them if they went to court and lost, and that’s highly irresponsible.

      Some posters with larger claims were referred to a legal professional who was well placed to take them on. Legal Beagles could have made the most of that legal talent being available to their posters if they chose to take that route, yet that source of help being opened up also lead to at least one addition to the Ban Club, even when the legal professionals who are part of Legal Beagles were nowhere to be seen and had already failed a number of posters who had relied on them in the past.

      • Legaleaglet says:

        Well, now we know the real reason they didn’t want anyone being referred to any professional, they were going to set up their little venture LB Compare. With Nemesis on the loose, more people are likely to turn to professional help than if they had people who know their stuff, posting on the forum.

        It’s still unbelievable that nobody should have warned those people about the potential for costs if they lost, I’m sure many wouldn’t even know that can happen and they could end up owing twice as much as they did to start with.

  6. Jon says:

    It is shocking and I feel for people who fall for this. Just to be fair , it is not just that site that has this sort of unqualified ‘advice’

    There is a lot of evidence to suggest that nemesis does not have the experience he claims, notably as already mentioned, he first appeared on cag asking for help for his daughter . Then of course we have the almost magical changes in attitude and opinion. The first one I can think of is the UE aspect and the 2nd one is his ‘advice’ on when the SB clock starts . He resolutely stuck to 6 years from last payment even when faced with quotes from legislation and quotes from National debt line, now he is quoting formal demand for payment as being the start.

    I am sure that he can come across as being very charming , particularly to women as i think he is a chauvinist

    Rant over

    • Legaleaglet says:

      No, it’s not the only site because all forums give unqualified ‘advice’, in fact they were set up for people to share their experiences, not to give advice, because some kinds of advice are regulated activities. However, LB has become a place where Nemesis gives advice all the time and there’s no-one there to challenge it because all those who did have joined the Ban Club.

      I could never say he comes across as charming, just because he often starts his posts with a greeting like “good morning…” which is not that customary on forums, it doesn’t mean he is charming. His posts are very obviously mass produced C&P jobs intended to achieve maximum coverage. A lot of the time he doesn’t even bother to read the thread!

      When he was on CAG his stance on challenging debts using the Consumer Credit Act was all the opposite from what he then went to post on LB and he could never tell the difference between an overdraft and a loan for the purpose of limitation, or most other things for that matter. His letter writing can be dangerous and that has also pointed out to the site team.

  7. John says:

    So Spooner claims the people banned were not needed because all they did was gossip! A bit rich considering his friendship with one team member who only ever chats in chatbox and posts the contents of a link! Clearly the people on LB are beyond clicking a link and reading then. He really is clueless when it comes to those two. He honestly believes they are not after his money. Hahaha!

  8. Dark Shadow says:

    Ahhh you mean the early morning chat’s between him and Enaid, isn’t that classed as gossip or does that not count as it’s at silly o’clock ?

    Of course he doesn’t realise they are after his money, they are adept at bull***t

  9. revenge says:

    OMG I worked my socks off and still got banned.

    Kate and Sharon have worked their charms on Mr Spooner and he just keeps on paying – more fool him. When the money dries up so will he no doubt.

    • Legaleaglet says:

      OMG I worked my socks off and still got banned.

      I reckon you are more likely to get banned if you work your socks off, they’ll discard you when they no longer need you. It’s just a matter of time for the axe to fall on Nemesis, which is long overdue.

      Kate and Sharon have worked their charms on Mr Spooner and he just keeps on paying – more fool him. When the money dries up so will he no doubt.

      Maybe the money HAS dried up, that would explain the monetisation of the site.

  10. Jon says:

    Oh deary me
    Nemesis really is losing it
    I have been looking at some threads on LB , one poor bloke has a claim for a 2002 cap 1 debt , the advice is just rubbish and the poor bloke will end up with a CCJ which I am fairly sure could have been avoided if a parrot was still there

    There is another one where he lists what is required on a recon agreement
    First he didn’t ask when it was taken out but he missed the classic name and address of creditor when the agreement was taken out, if I remember there were some odd citi/opos agreements that were giving the wrong OC

    What a bloody numbskull
    If I wasn’t so sodding stubborn I would sign up and give him hell

    • Banned beagle says:

      Nemesis really is losing it

      Losing it? Did he ever have it?

      I have been looking at some threads on LB , one poor bloke has a claim for a 2002 cap 1 debt , the advice is just rubbish and the poor bloke will end up with a CCJ which I am fairly sure could have been avoided if a parrot was still there

      Nemesis never liked the parrot getting in his way, he didn’t like sharing the glory or being shown wrong.

      There is another one where he lists what is required on a recon agreement First he didn’t ask when it was taken out but he missed the classic name and address of creditor when the agreement was taken out, if I remember there were some odd citi/opos agreements that were giving the wrong OC

      Yes, Citi cards were sold to Opus and claims were being issued saying they were for “an agreement between xyz and Opus” when there had never been such an agreement. PT flagged it up when he was around.

      What a bloody numbskull If I wasn’t so sodding stubborn I would sign up and give him hell

      What’s stopping you? Go for it!

  11. revenge says:

    It is horrible Jon to see peeps being given wrong advice and especially after other posters who could have helped like FP would have saved the day with excellent advice. Well the facts are now down to the money making adventure on their compare market and not getting free advice on the forums anymore. What is the point of going in there to start a rumpus you would only get banned. That is the way they want it so when peeps get into trouble they will refer them on to the comparison site for proper help.

    • Legaleaglet says:

      Yes, it all makes sense from that perspective. They get advice from Nemesis, he drafts his usual letters, the OPs get further into trouble or come back with a CCJ. They need legal advice, LB Compare is standing by, ready to welcome them with open arms.

      I think FP was one of the top posters there, I guess there wasn’t enough room for both FP and Nemesis and they chose him because he’s more likely to give the kind of advice that will get people into a position where they need the services of LB Compare.

  12. Dark Shadow says:

    One day, someone will get some duff assistance, probably lose everything, the poor person will have nothing else to lose and will decide to expose it all over the internet, next the media will get hold of it, we all know where that leads and it’s not good publicity, in fact the old saying that ‘its yesterdays news’ doesn’t work nowadays, as it can be brought up time after time after time. I for one would not like to be in their shoes when it happens.

    • Legaleaglet says:

      It would be good if it happened to a resourceful person such as what you describe. Sadly most LB posters, at least the ones with claims, seem to be people who suffer from ill health, depression, mental health issues, have been through relationship break-ups and general upheaval in their lives. Most don’t look like the sort of person who would go out of their way to expose them, in fact, over the years I’ve seen quite a few people get CCJs and they just quietly post about it then usually disappear. They wouldn’t have known how to deal with the matter themselves or where to look for legal help, they’d probably assume they couldn’t afford it anyway so they don’t really see it as being LB’s fault, in other words, they just don’t know what they were missing.

Leave a Reply

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