Stephanie Hayden

I'm just dipping my toes into the fruity farm on SH - wow.

These are very courageous men. It's so frustrating that lunatic SH can so completely misuse the Help for Fees scheme. I wish a judge could block their access to that.

Ahh, the High Court action today was, at least in part, LegalGengar as a third party giving an undertaking not to publish witness statements in someone else's case.

It might be that LegalGengar ends up as a defendant in a claim yet to be launched.

Thanks for the clarification SabrinaThwaite.

That would make sense for the occasional cryptic comments in the Xitter replies about the timing of Legal Gengar’s article appearing today. I’ve no idea about why injunction is being sought, but wonder if the legal arguments rest on Doyle saying things that are or are not in the public domain. It makes me wonder if there is an overlap between what Doyle has said and what Legal Gengar has said. Which may of course have a bearing on Doyle’s hearing.

Might be wrong but it's my understanding is that today's hearing is Hayden seeking an injunction against Sean Doyle to stop him posting stuff online.

The hearing on Friday at Willesden County Court is a re-run of the £10k claim Hayden made against Doyle for harassment and misuse of private information - I think this was originally filed last year but Doyle was ill and didn't attend court so Hayden won by default. Doyle has appealed or applied to have it set aside or something and it's now being heard on Friday.

From what I've gleaned, Hooded Claw is Sean Doyle, who from his Twitter I think I'd entirely disagree with on many subjects. He's being sued by SH and that's what the Willesden court dates are.

Legal Gengar is someone who writes about grifts and has now just been targeted by SH. Different people.

Yes - that's the Sean Doyle case. Hayden is suing Sean for libel, I think, ie for revealing spent convictions. I might be wrong.

Unless I've misunderstood, the High Court action today relates to LegalGengar and the hearing at Willesden County Court on 16 February relates to someone else.

That is exactly the name I was trying to remember! In the end, I gave up and pressed Post without mentioning JY.

For readers unfamilar with JY: JY is a male transitioner from Canada. JY became internationally notorious after suing a female beautician because she declined to perform intimate waxing on JY's male genitalia. The courts eventually ruled that if beauticians hadn't been trained how to wax testicles, then they were justified in saying that wasn't a service they could offer.

Previous to that case, JY had made hay by threatening to sue multiple self-employed beauticians/estheticians for refusing to wax JY's genital area. I don't know how many of them paid JY off, but some of them definitely did.

The final court case establishing their right to refuse male clients only went all the way to court because the defendant knew she wasn't the first woman to be sued for refusing to wax JY's genitals!

Ah, I see there's a pre hearing at the High Court today.

The 16th Feb is (was?) Willesden County Court.

Help with Fees is based upon income, claiming certain benefits and savings:

https://www.gov.uk/get-help-with-court-fees

You can apply on line or by using the paper form:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/65cc8b5f39a8a7000f60d502/EX160_1123.pdf

The declaration states that giving false information has consequences.

My understanding is that, amongst other things, you are automatically entitled to help if you receive certain benefits.

More info here: https://www.gov.uk/get-help-with-court-fees

And you lose entitlement if you get a CRO.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/civil-restraint-orders--2

Does anyone have knowledge of how the Help for Fees system work?
Does it involve making a signed declaration about the applying individual's financial circumstances? And if you tell porkies, or bend the truth in that declaration is it considered fraud?

Apropos of nothing, if I were to take a dozen or so trips every year to, oh let’s say, Australia, South Africa and multiple European cities, and use first class train travel / fly business class to at least some of those destinations, can I claim Help for Fees?

Isn't Hooded Claw's court date Feb 16th?

SH is basically the UK version of J.Yanniv. Hopefully it’ll all backfire at some point.

Afaik, HC is determined to see it through to the end in court, has nothing to lose and is not asking for funds to aid the case.
I hope there is some metaphorical floor wiping.
Even if the litigiant loses, there is seemingly no financial penalty, he has never paid a penny to anyone it seems. Quite how somebody gets high rate PiP and manages to swan around the world is quite miraculous.

SH doesn't need to win in court. To gain financially, SH merely needs to open a case, pursue it part of the way (causing massive legal expense and stress to the defendant) and then offer to accept a settlement out-of-court in exchange for discontinuing the case.

It would certainly be cheaper to write SH a cheque than to continue the case all the way to the courts, which may well explain why SH has discontinued so many cases.

Not generally harming themselves financially as using the Help for Fees scheme and not paying for legal representation makes it exceedingly cheap to do.

Although there are reports of sums being due for cases that have been lost.

The Fruit Farmers have been keeping a tally I believe.

This is true but realistically the AG only makes s42 orders for the most vexatious litigants (e.g. those who have had a number of CROs and/or who keep having their CROs extended). The AG only issues about 1 or 2 a year usually. CROs are normally appropriate - they last a few years and give people a chance to change their ways, whereas the s42 orders are a more permanent solution.

I've managed to obtain and extend a few CROs in my work before, but I've never managed to get a s42 order (although I can see one person that I have had dealings with on the list of s42 vexatious litigants now, but I didn't make the application).

Perhaps SH enjoys the humiliation?

Whoever SS is, their attempts at insults and threats are pathetic.

I wasn't aware of this Twitter account before but I'll be reading now!

Is there a compulsion at play here? All this attention being given to SH but nothing actually coming from it? SH isn’t winning these cases and is harming themselves financially and mentally, is it about frightening and threatening the defendants? Getting attention? Using the law for validation? It isn’t normal behaviour.

That is such a great statement!

It is so clear that Hayden has implied that it is about all the article in their very wide and open language. Yet, it was about a small part and the article is very much still up and accessible to the public.

Hayden isn't going to win in getting this taken down, I don't think. But must posture to make it look like Hayden indeed has this power to remove all the bits of their personal history that don't fit Hayden's carefully curated desired history. This is very instructional on the limits of the law.

Why does Hayden keep getting away with it? I don't understand it.