[Archived] Sheff Wed Fail In Legal Action

[Bing]

Quite incredible really. The board brought legal proceedings against the 'Owlstalk' messageboard over comments made by some posters.

Full story:

http://www.sheffwed.vitalfootball.co.uk/article.asp?a=86536

A disasterous piece of PR for the club. What sort of right-minded owner goes after its own supporters in such an aggressive way?

[bblue]

Whaaat? What on earth made them think that would ever have any chances of succeeding in anything other than aggravating the fans? What an idiotic move, I'd have trouble believing this as a joke....

[yoda]

There are still 4 people in the sticky stuff though, best be careful what you say in future, if the mods don't get you JW may well do

[bblue]

Christ, what the hell did they post??

Unless it's something like "we've placed a bomb in the stadium" I don't think it's worth a court case. There must be scariere stuff out there on the internet than the comments of some football fans.

[tcj_jones]

I used to visit that site occasionally. Sheffield Wednesday are my second team.

It's unbelieveable really. The relationship between the owner and the fans is complex and Dave Allen is, generally, very unpopular and will not relinquish control of the club. However, it really is difficult to properly understand. I'd love to know more, if anybody knows more than I do?

[Bing]

There's not much around on what the accused originally posted but this provides the biggest hints really:

http://www.metro.co.uk/news/article.html?i...p;in_page_id=34

And the following is a posting by one of them, discussing the situation he finds himself in:

Hi

Its been a long time since I posted here on Owlstalk - although I understand quite a few people have asked about me - which is nice, thanks.

My last post on Owlstalk was back in February 2006 - when many of you will remember was shortly after I had been asked to leave the clubs executive area when I was dining with a friend of mine who owned an executive box. I say 'owned' rather than 'owns' because as a result of that day he hasn't renewed his box, and actually hasn't returned to Hillsborough either since then.

Later that day I was contacted by the Admin of Owlstalk and advised that the club were looking to pursue legal action against me for alleged defamation. This was the first time I had been aware of any offence being taken as a result of my postings on this message board - and although this news was broken to me indirectly - I asked Admin to delete my account and all of my postings. This was the easiest way of ensuring that any offensive posts disappeared for good.

Some weeks later I was written to by Irwin Mitchell Solicitors - who advised me that the club were looking to pursue legal action against me for defamation, however this could be avoided if I paid the clubs legal bill and apologised. I chose not to take advise from a solicitor at that stage - and offered to meet their demands. I had no wish to enter into a lengthly, and above all, costly legal battle. If I'm honest - neither did I want to see my football club enter into a legal battle either that would not only prove costly, but in my opinion potentially divisive too. At the time Irwin Mitchell claimed that their legal bill was £2500 - and I offered to pay it on receipt of a summary of costs, as I felt that was extremely expensive for sending me a letter - obviously they had to account for consultation with their client too - but I still felt within my rights to request this. I was written to again by Irwin Mitchell who told me I should expect to be paying damages as well as costs of around £40,000.00.

Some weeks passed - and shortly after I was called to ameeting with my employer. Irwin Mitchell had written to them on behalf of the club reserving the right to impound my work laptop, and copying my employer in on all of the allegations they were making about me. Obviously this was embarassing, especially as at that time some of the quotes attributed to me were not actually made by me. Additionally the letter from Irwin Mitchell had asked if my employer found it appropriate that I was making posts to Owlstalk in working hours - although my time was, and is, always flexible and to be fair - Irwin Mitchells would not have known that.

I discussed the issue with several close (wednesdayite) friends, and I was advised by Daryl Keys of Wednesdayite that I should speak to another Wednesdayite who had heard of the problems I was experiencing and had offered to support me with the use of his solicitor. This proved to be a tremendous help. The solictor advised me throughout - and removed much of the worry. We were contacted a number of times requesting costs be paid (these had escalated enormously) and for the apology to be made - and as a result of the escalation in costs we always maintained that we had offered to pay the costs when they were £2500 and apologise - and that this offer stood.

After 14th February 2007 - I was advised by my solicitor that the deadline of 12 months for issuing proceedings to me had passed without incident and that the problem was no longer. The solicitor was paid by my Wednesdayite benefactor and I began to get on with life. Anyone who has been through what I have will know how painful and worrying a process it is - it made my divorce seem like a birthday party.

Around 2 weeks ago I was contacted again by my solicitor who advised me that the club had issued proceedings against me on 13th February (on the last possible day they could). They had also waited the maximum possible time (4 months) to serve those proceedings. Their reason for doing this is known only to them.

Having met with my solicitor and considered their Particulars of Claim - my solictor has concluded that the claim is so unlikely to succeed that they have offered to represent me on a CFA basis (no win-no fee).

And that is the current state of play. Right now the solicitors are at the sending letters to each other to clarify points stage - but there is a very real possibility that this case could well end up in court now - and thats what I wanted to avoid at the outset. Regardless of the fact that my benefactor is covering all of the legal costs - it is still a very worrying time - and my advice to anyone on this site or others - is watch your words - they are being scrutinised and I would hate for anyone to have the 16 months I've just experienced.

[Tim Southampton Rover]

No more football opinions please!

[eddiecolne]

Bet Vinjay is sh***ing himself.

[thenodrog]

Dunno what it is but Sheff Wed AS A CLUB cannot win. Pathetically Orwellian overtones all round. What are they gonna do next..... bug every pub tap room in the City?

[American]

Bet Vinjay is sh***ing himself.

[The Harwood Yankee]

I heard that the Burnley website was thinking of going ahead with legal action against some posters who spread untrue rumours about the club. Apparently they accused them of 'playing half-decent football at times', and being 'in with a shout for promotion this season'. Such fictions are said to be harmful to the reputation club has worked hard to build over the last few years as a laughable footballing entity with as much chance of silverware as Borat has of becoming secretary-general of the United Nations.

Experts say the culprits are definitely Burnley fans as all evidence points to someone typing with their feet on a stolen keyboard.

[CAPT KAYOS]

Sound similar to the guy at Darlington I think it was.

As El Tombro says - the guy might not be telling the full story and seems willing /or is trying to be clever to easily.

Does seem a bit petty by the club for what something that 'appears' as if it could have been better resolved amicably , but as mentioned until the full facts are revealed its a little difficult to comment as an 'outsider'.

[jim mk2]

Bin Laden's a footy fan so he might have seen this site.

I wonder if old Enoch will get a "visit" from Al-Quaeda ?

[ABBEY]

arise sir jim...100% flawless

[USRoverME]

FYI, this isn't the only case like this, there was a case recently like this surrounding Hereford as well.

[bblue]

I somehow get the feeling this 'victim' isn't telling the whole story. He sounds extremely angelic to pay damages and costs for something he didn't do, all in the name of his beloved club and protecting the board?!

You might be true, but if there really is something solid against this guy, surely the Sheff club would have used it so far?

[Jan]

You might be true, but if there really is something solid against this guy, surely the Sheff club would have used it so far?

They have- which is why the judge has kept the action against him going!

[thenodrog]

Whats the betting that its down to a personal insult / accusation / insinuation toward a director rather than actually damaging to the club?

[bblue]

They have- which is why the judge has kept the action against him going!

And why not make it public then so we get a better understanding of their motives then?

[bblue]

Whats the betting that its down to a personal insult / accusation / insinuation toward a director rather than actually damaging to the club?

And that would be indictable? So if I say f*** [insert public figure here] is that subject to a court case?

[philipl]

The Guardian report on the case.

[American Rover12]

That's sick. A conversation on a forum is just banter and opinions back and forth. It shouldn't be taken so harshly. Maybe i should cancel my account and make a new one with fake info in case i ever disagree with something about the club.

[Alan75]

That's sick. A conversation on a forum is just banter and opinions back and forth. It shouldn't be taken so harshly. Maybe i should cancel my account and make a new one with fake info in case i ever disagree with something about the club.

Sometimes posts can go beyond Banter and opinions; and cross the line to being an aledged ilegal comment.

Before something is written in the media a team of lawyers will check the legality before going to press, so why should the internet be any different.

Members have critized the admin / mods on this site for closing / deleting posts, citing free speech, but would they want the same Sheffield Wednesday senario here.

Site Rule 13. No questionable content or links

Please ensure your posts do not include "questionable" content or links to such content. This is a requirement of our host and will be strictly enforced. This includes (but is not limited to) pornography, race hate, Warez, hacking, material legally judged to be threatening or obscene, and material protected by trade secrets.

[thenodrog]

Whats the betting that its down to a personal insult / accusation / insinuation toward a director rather than actually damaging to the club?

From that report.......

Clare Dyer, legal editor The Guardian Monday October 22 2007

"Disgruntled fans of Sheffield Wednesday who vented their dissatisfaction with the football club's bigwigs in anonymous internet postings may face expensive libel claims after the chairman, chief executive and five directors won a high-court ruling last week forcing the owner of a website to reveal their identity. "

So predicatable and just as I guessed ...... it's just the bruised ego's of some of Sheffields nouveau riche. Or if you prefer it ....... 'small dick, big desk' syndrome.

[American]

I think it is a case that should be watched by those on here who have been making un-researched allegations about potential buyers of the club....