Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To think well done to Neil Sands and Donna Sands for taking their case to get Tattle Life shut down to the court of appeal.

92 replies

TheWorthySeal · 01/06/2026 13:06

I really admire Neil Sands and Donna Sands, they have all the money in the world and continue to fight on to make the internet a safer place. The Lady Chief Justice has seen that they have strong grounds to appeal.

OP posts:
OneBrickFinch · 02/06/2026 10:33

Shouldn't there be an investigation as to how their lawyers mislead the court to gain £1.5 million in fees and £300k for their clients?

The persons unknown was a lie that they kept up for years. The service was defective. There must be more important things for the court to spend their time on.

Gingerkittykat · 02/06/2026 01:13

DavidStopActingLikeADisgruntledPelican · 01/06/2026 16:32

Having lurked on some tattle threads, it doesn’t seem that bad tbh. Certainly no worse than some of the threads on here and definitely nowhere near as the behaviour of some of the people they discuss.

I will admit to being agog at the tenacity of some of the posters who manage to dig up information, read through pages of court documents etc. I don’t have the patience time for that. Fair play. And seeing the likes of dr Jessica Taylor getting called out for being an absolute clown will never not be a positive.

I think the tenacity can border on stalking. I used to be active on the Jack Monroe threads, and some of the posters went beyond what is normal. I remember logging in after a long gap to see what was going on and they were talking about having plans of her house and looking up which way her ensuite door opened!

MillicentReally · 01/06/2026 23:55

Quitelikeit · 01/06/2026 21:04

I went on there to read the Letby threads during the court case

There was definitely some people on there who seemed to enjoy being nasty and cruel for no apparent reason or benefit

Somehow they also claimed to have insider knowledge on Katie and Kieron - the comments were also typically vile

It was no surprise to me that someone took the owners to task it was only a matter of time

I doubt the website will be shut down as that will set a dangerous precedent and open the floodgates

You’re not wrong, but I don’t think coming from a position of superiority works when posting on here. The Letby threads on here aren’t exactly edifying.

TheFairyCaravan · 01/06/2026 21:18

I really like Tattle. The posters on the threads I’m on are really kind and friendly to each other, just not to the grifting child exploiters, and make me laugh. I find it really funny that so many grifters are adamant they don’t read Tattle yet address what’s being said on there on a regular basis. If they weren’t such awful people they wouldn’t be being talked about.

Glowingup · 01/06/2026 21:07

Lauren1983 · 01/06/2026 13:24

Ha! Got to be! Either that or Donna or Neil themselves.

My guess is Jess, Jaimi or Jaimi’s mum

icybreeze · 01/06/2026 21:05

MissFancyDay · 01/06/2026 20:59

I thought that the Sands and their lawyer deliberately misled the judge by pretending they didn't know the owner of Tattle?

Haven't they heard of sunk costs? They are just throwing more good money away.

It certainly reads like that to me

Quitelikeit · 01/06/2026 21:04

I went on there to read the Letby threads during the court case

There was definitely some people on there who seemed to enjoy being nasty and cruel for no apparent reason or benefit

Somehow they also claimed to have insider knowledge on Katie and Kieron - the comments were also typically vile

It was no surprise to me that someone took the owners to task it was only a matter of time

I doubt the website will be shut down as that will set a dangerous precedent and open the floodgates

Tableforjoan · 01/06/2026 21:00

MissFancyDay · 01/06/2026 20:59

I thought that the Sands and their lawyer deliberately misled the judge by pretending they didn't know the owner of Tattle?

Haven't they heard of sunk costs? They are just throwing more good money away.

I believe someone’s posted of the site of the readers a screenshot showing they knew full
well who the owner was during the claim to court they did not.

As did a few of their influscammers.

MillicentReally · 01/06/2026 20:59

TheWorthySeal · 01/06/2026 20:26

I'm someone with a moral compass and a commonwealth law degree.

Well then, would you not be aware that this type of online discussion is almost always ill-advised? 🤔

MissFancyDay · 01/06/2026 20:59

I thought that the Sands and their lawyer deliberately misled the judge by pretending they didn't know the owner of Tattle?

Haven't they heard of sunk costs? They are just throwing more good money away.

MillicentReally · 01/06/2026 20:58

TheWorthySeal · 01/06/2026 20:25

It says it in black and white
conclude that these were honest mistakes, not intended to mislead or create any tactical advantage.
On Mr Lynch's averment this was an honest mistake, not a tactical decision

https://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/format.cgi?doc=/nie/cases/NIHC/KB/2026/20.html

I can’t say I’m a fan of tattle, although it’s one of many similar forums.

Regardless this document, have you actually read it? I can’t say I’d be linking it if it referred to my court case, it’s not flattering. Scroll to the end and work up to make it quick to see what the actual alleged issues were.

Speaking of which, it seems as though careless discussion of this case might not have served them well the first time around. I think it would be particularly ill-advised for anyone related to have started this particular thread?

TotalBaloney · 01/06/2026 20:56

TheWorthySeal · 01/06/2026 20:55

From being a very successful silicone valley tech entrepreneur and running a popular fashion brand. A judge has ruled that comments on the internet were abusive and defamatory.

Can you share that judgment?

TheWorthySeal · 01/06/2026 20:55

TotalBaloney · 01/06/2026 20:34

Why have they got ‘all the money in the world’, by the way? ‘Earned’ from their dodgy businesses?

From being a very successful silicone valley tech entrepreneur and running a popular fashion brand. A judge has ruled that comments on the internet were abusive and defamatory.

OP posts:
QueefofSheena · 01/06/2026 20:48

TheWorthySeal · 01/06/2026 20:26

I'm someone with a moral compass and a commonwealth law degree.

And yet here you are, salivating

HDready · 01/06/2026 20:34

TheWorthySeal · 01/06/2026 20:25

It says it in black and white
conclude that these were honest mistakes, not intended to mislead or create any tactical advantage.
On Mr Lynch's averment this was an honest mistake, not a tactical decision

https://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/format.cgi?doc=/nie/cases/NIHC/KB/2026/20.html

Isn’t this the original judgment? Where is the Court of Appeal decision?

TotalBaloney · 01/06/2026 20:34

Why have they got ‘all the money in the world’, by the way? ‘Earned’ from their dodgy businesses?

TheWorthySeal · 01/06/2026 20:26

Tableforjoan · 01/06/2026 20:15

Could be Lauryn benefits cheat Goodman.

I'm someone with a moral compass and a commonwealth law degree.

OP posts:
TheWorthySeal · 01/06/2026 20:25

RoseField1 · 01/06/2026 16:28

No it doesn't say that at all 😄

It says it in black and white
conclude that these were honest mistakes, not intended to mislead or create any tactical advantage.
On Mr Lynch's averment this was an honest mistake, not a tactical decision

https://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/format.cgi?doc=/nie/cases/NIHC/KB/2026/20.html

Sands & Anor v Bond & Ors [2026] NIKB 20 (05 May 2026)

https://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/format.cgi?doc=%2Fnie%2Fcases%2FNIHC%2FKB%2F2026%2F20.html

OP posts:
Tableforjoan · 01/06/2026 20:24

QueefofSheena · 01/06/2026 20:20

Crossed my mind too

Must really piss Lauren goodger off when the two get mixed up in articles and comments 😅

QueefofSheena · 01/06/2026 20:20

Tableforjoan · 01/06/2026 20:15

Could be Lauryn benefits cheat Goodman.

Crossed my mind too

Tableforjoan · 01/06/2026 20:15

Lauren1983 · 01/06/2026 13:24

Ha! Got to be! Either that or Donna or Neil themselves.

Could be Lauryn benefits cheat Goodman.

MillicentReally · 01/06/2026 20:01

TheWorthySeal · 01/06/2026 16:22

You have obvs not read the ruling. It clearly states their lawyer made an honest mistake and this was a technicality. The Lady Chief Justice has seen this so allowed an appeal to fix it. She wouldn't allow an appeal unless there was clearly a mistake that needed to be fixed.

This thread prompted me to google and the Reddit threads have a fascinatingly different view on this.

TotalBaloney · 01/06/2026 19:49

Melancholyflower · 01/06/2026 19:18

I wondered what they had done, or how people knew about them, to warrant anyone wanting to start/comment on a thread about them on Tattle.

Very little, really. She was a minor ‘influencer’ and the criticism on her thread was mainly about her dodgy business practices (selling wholesale Chinese goods with a massive markup, crap quality etc). It was a very slow moving thread with not many contributors, so I don’t think they were particularly well known before this whole debacle.

Melancholyflower · 01/06/2026 19:18

TotalBaloney · 01/06/2026 18:31

They’re nobodies, who had a really slow moving and dull thread on Tattle about their dodgy dealings. They sued Tattle but misled the court by saying they didn’t know the owner was and therefore he could not be served, when it has been proven that they did.
A judgement was ruled in their favour in his absence, but it was overturned due to their dishonestly. They have now been given leave to appeal, but of course that doesn’t mean that this case will succeed. It just means he will now be able to defend himself.

I wondered what they had done, or how people knew about them, to warrant anyone wanting to start/comment on a thread about them on Tattle.

MovedlikeHarlowinMonteCarlo · 01/06/2026 19:03

Lol this is a ridiculous thread.

Swipe left for the next trending thread