Re:Man to pay £25,000 ($34,000) damages over negative TrustP...
by edenhyacinth on Tuesday February 09, 2021 @01:52PM
(#26081174)
The judgment alleges that indicating that you believe a company to be a scam - insofar as providing an unsatisfactory service for payment could be considered a scam - is on par with accusing someone of urinating on war memorials.
It even says that couching the statement in an opinion "To me it was a scam" wouldn't be sufficient to avoid this. Would it all have been saved if he'd said "It was like a scam"?
It also says that the claimaint's belief that "after a single review went up, we saw a drop in inquiries" (para) is sufficient for £25,000 of damages! That has to be considered outrageous, surely?
It even says that couching the statement in an opinion "To me it was a scam" wouldn't be sufficient to avoid this. Would it all have been saved if he'd said "It was like a scam"?
It also says that the claimaint's belief that "after a single review went up, we saw a drop in inquiries" (para) is sufficient for £25,000 of damages! That has to be considered outrageous, surely?