To be so upset people think we left without paying?

Here we go. A recent case involving Dale Vince. Headline and caption found to be libellous even though the story wasn’t.

www.nelsonslaw.co.uk/defamation-based-on-photograph/

It absolutely is libellous….. courts will understand that most people will read only the headline and the picture…. as very clearly evidenced by the fact the vast majority of comments have assumed it’s your party. It’s very clear to the pub as to the misunderstanding that is happening as they can see the comments.
I would be reporting to the ICO for a breach of GDPR and taking legal advice asap.

Yes, as every ropey advertiser knows, most people just look at a photo and a headline and take on board whatever inplied message you want them to from that.

It doesn't make much difference what actual truths you tell them in the text below, as only a tiny percentage of people will ever actually bother to read it.

People on here telling OP to shout loudly and protest/prove her innocence in the comments underneath the post don't seem to realise that it will make no difference - the few sensible, measured people who would read below have already done so and thus haven't hurled entirely unjustified accusations at OP's group in the first place.

They neglected to blur, black out or crop out the images of the OP and her family.

people don’t read every word of every bit of content. That’s just not how we read and why newspapers are designed in the way they are. Are you honestly telling me you’ve never glanced at a newspaper story by skimming the headline and first paragraph and moving on?

I think you still have a case for libel/defamation even though the posters did specify your family wasn’t the one accused of thieving. The parameters are something along the lines of whether what’s been said causes harm to your reputation or lowers it in the estimation of “right-thinking people”.

You can absolutely argue that many “right-thinking people” have been left thinking you’re a thief. Your place of work has been linked which could have professional ramifications. They included images of you in a post about thieves which has led to hundreds of comments from people thinking you’re involved.

Screenshot the post and screenshot any comments identifying you and your place of work. I’d definitely look into making a case.

It depends on the framing. If it’s a photo and caption saying “these thieving bastards didn’t pay for their meal” that could be a libel. That there’s a clarification in a screed of text doesn’t stop the headline and caption being libellous. Headlines can be libellous even if the content in the story isn’t.

Don’t reasonable readers…read?

Take a photo of your receipt and some text that says something to the effect that you are family in the background and not involved and that manager will not respond to you to more clearly state that it was not you. Reply to each post reply with this image! I know it’s work but it should reduce more people responding.

Exactly! That is why libel is so serious. Perhaps get a solicitor to write and demand a rebuttal of the impression they have given, and an apology. Otherwise s/he will start a libel suit on your behalf (no harm in threatening this).

Oh not only do you know that it is actionable but you’ve assessed the quantum of damages too?!

what did the pub neglect to do? They specifically say the OP’s party isn’t involved. If thickos don’t read that the court isn’t going to say that makes it libellous.

Jesus it really really isn’t.

The OP is getting ridiculous advice from people who seem to think they know the law (and don’t).

Because you can commit libel through negligence!

How can it be libel when the pub have specifically said that the party isn’t involved?!

Its misleading though. There is absolutely no need to have included the OP and her family and in doing so she's being targeted by strangers and people she knows. The fact they included one line saying they had paid doesn't detract from the fact her families image is alongside the spiel about people not paying.

Small claims under £10k costs little

What crime do you believe has been committed?

The pub isn’t accusing her party of not paying

I'd be very tempted to find an article online about some food establishment that has been done by Environmental Health and then make a mini collage with a big photo of the guilty party next to an equally big photo of the pub you went to, with their sign very prominent.

Post it on FB with a massive title saying "Restaurant with filthy kitchen prosecuted by Environmental Health".

Then add two or three dramatic paragraphs about how horrifyingly disgusting it all is, followed by a very brief mention that the other pub, by contrast, does nice, safe food and is totally unconnected to the headline.

Then just wait for the pub to contact you...

It isn’t.

The restaurant specifically says they are not involved in the post. I don’t see that a court would overlook that even if people commenting on the post do.

True, a court case would cost eye watering sums of money. However, an hour of advice and a couple of letters may be sufficient to resolve this and costs can be agreed before work is undertaken. This is not my area of law but in my area a letter from a lawyer telling a business owner that there is the potential for legal action is usually enough to stop them doing something they shouldn’t be doing. There is never any harm in asking for advice from a lawyer, but always check what their fees are first!

Also you’d have a lot of screenshots to show the image did cause reasonable readers to think the statement applied to you …

Which is against what law specifically?