Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Legal matters

Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you have any legal concerns we suggest you consult a solicitor.

Original poster

Is this a police matter or a civil matter

96 replies

ixqic · 30/06/2014 19:03

I suspect someone I work with has written a letter of complaint about me pretending to be a member of the public to get me into trouble at work. In short, I work with children/vulnerable adults so the implications for me could have been significant.

In short it has become evidence in a disciplinary hearing which has already happened and which has been dismissed.

I think I now have evidence which seems to confirm my suspicion and I want to know where I stand.

Where ought to I go next? I know I can go to my union with my suspicion but I wonder if going to the police is also a possibility.

Thanks in advance for reading and replying.

OP posts:
settingsitting · 08/07/2014 10:52

And actually, to anyone that is lurking.

It has made me realise that the legal board on mumsnet for the last 10 years or whatever, is full of legal holes.

Nicknacky · 08/07/2014 10:54

I am sure but if you can show otherwise then I'm all ears, not merely for me but for the op who has asked if it is a crime. If you have the answer, then give it to her.

I don't have to say what I am when I post, and i certainly never indicated I was a lawyer!

And if you would care to not the warning underneath "legal matters" then it dogs not really matter what people say they are, proper legal advise should be sought if needed.

Nicknacky · 08/07/2014 10:56

This is a legal posting forum on mumsnet. It's not a replacement for proper legal advice and should not be considered one.

settingsitting · 08/07/2014 10:59

If you are sure, then I dont understand why a criminal lawyer and BerylStreep [who I assume is legal too?] disagree with you?

And it is only polite to say that you are not a lawyer, if your words are brought into possible disrepute.

So if you are right, are you saying that Amateur and Beryl are wrong?

settingsitting · 08/07/2014 10:59

This is a legal posting forum on mumsnet. It's not a replacement for proper legal advice and should not be considered one.

Quite. Glad that you wrote that.

Nicknacky · 08/07/2014 11:14

I take everyone with a pinch of salt as to what the say they are and I hope most posters do the same.

I don't have to qualify myself to disagree with a poster? How odd that we have to basically compete who has the most qualifications/experience. And not everyone in the legal system will agree with each other.

I don't agree with them which is why I have asked for an example.

Flexibilityiskey · 08/07/2014 11:17

setting you seem to have a very simplistic view of the law. It is open to interpretation, so it is not always as simple as one person is right and one is wrong.

It is also worth remembering that just because an offence can be identified that does not mean that dealing with it criminally is the best option. As I understand it in this case the advice given to the OP has been that it is best to deal with this via her employer. Do you disagree with that?

settingsitting · 08/07/2014 11:24

How odd that we have to basically compete who has the most qualifications/experience

So you wouldnt agree that the ones with the most, know the most? Hmm

I am not in the lawyer business Flexibility. But yes, I would definitely expect lawyers to know what they are talking about.
I now am no longer under the obviously false illusion that police officers do. And yes it was naive of me to expect them too.

I will await lawyers to come back on and advise hopefully correctly if anything is still amiss on this thread.

settingsitting · 08/07/2014 11:26

I take everyone with a pinch of salt as to what the say they are and I hope most posters do the same.

I agree with that to a certain extent. But some posters are quite prolific and a picture, normally accurately can be built up.
That is why for example, I have discovered both out of date social work advice, and wrong pharmiceutical advice being dolled out on mumsnet as if it is correct, which it turns out not to be.

There have been other examples too.

Nicknacky · 08/07/2014 11:32

Can I also point out lawyers will not know the law in fine detail for every single offence.

I have sat in discussion which the procurator fiscal about cases and they has sought guidance from colleagues or text. And you know, they have been to law school as well!

I'm unsure why you are so quick to agree with someone who claims to be a lawyer? Is that just because they said so? Or do you have a working knowledge that also makes you agree with them?

JaneParker · 08/07/2014 11:33

You could certainly try to report it to the police but might be better to get it sorted out internally first just in case you are wrong and blight the accused person's life for years. Might be kinder not to rush to the police.

Someone in a court action recently forged a letter from the judge ( a very bad forgery) saying the case was decided on XYZ terms. The judge has taken no action against that man which is amazing. The man was a litigant in person in some kind of commercial case.

settingsitting · 08/07/2014 11:35

See, JaneParker I know a lot about her from her posts on mumsnet, and I know that she checks out. On here and in real life.
So I would certainly take her advice.

Nicknacky · 08/07/2014 11:37

Which is ask the police? The same ones you say know nothing?

So when someone posts for advice, only known posters are allowed to post. No problem, I won't bother in future.

settingsitting · 08/07/2014 12:19

JP is a solicitor. She is not the police!

Nicknacky · 08/07/2014 12:29

Her advice is to report it if she wants. I never said she was police.

JaneParker · 08/07/2014 13:21

In general in life it tends to be better to keep the police out of things if you can particularly as some people jump to conclusions about things and it might not be what it seems and you'd have started an investigation. If you can first see what can be done at work about it and only when that process is over consider the police that might be a better idea.

Nicknacky · 08/07/2014 13:32

I totally agree Jane. Once the police involvement is over people still have to work/live/see each other. It's not always the answer and it doesn't force people to get on with each other.

WestmorlandSausage · 08/07/2014 18:49

Yes, I'm a farmer. A farmer who also has an undergraduate law degree and a MA in a related but not a wholly legal profession. I work within legal frameworks daily. You do like to put people into boxes don't you settingsitting? People don't always fit into nice neat boxes you know Grin

and I'm not going to read into your clearly implied 'your a farmer so you must be thick' comment.

ThatVikRinA22 · 08/07/2014 19:11

guys...im on holiday right now away with family but i just want to say that while laywers know theory police officers are the ones with the practical experience of getting stuff to court in the first place.

i know taht this would never in a million years get to a court of law.
just saying. as a police officer. it may not be moral, or right, but the law in most cases is an ass....
ask any cop.

bouwing out now to enjoy the rest of my jollies.

settingsitting · 08/07/2014 21:40

Didnt mean that farmers are thick. It never crossed my mind.

But neither is this in any way your area of expertise.
Whereas , for others on here, it is.

FFSFFS · 08/07/2014 21:59

Vicar.
I don't understand why you are reiterating the fact that this wouldn't be the type of thing the police would be interested in. Everyone, including AmatureDad agrees that it is not something that the CPS would be likely to prosecute.

The OP asked where they stood with this issue, some posters gave incorrect 'legal' information and some lawyers corrected this. They never said the police should or would deal with it. Confused

settingsitting · 08/07/2014 22:12

I get it now.
Nicknacky and WestmorlandSausage were on a legal thread yesterday woth Amateurdad.
And because they think he is a man, they felt talked down to!

Didnt realise that there was a not at all relevant to this thread, back issue.

op, if I were you, I would take notice of the solicitor and the criminal lawyer on this thread.

WestmorlandSausage · 08/07/2014 22:20

Nickynacky and WestmorlandSausage both have a posting history of longer than one week which neither AmateurDad, settingsitting or FFSFFS do have, although I appreciate all three of you may have name changed in the last week.

and settingsitting if you look carefully I think you will find I commented on this thread before I found the other thread (a good 45 minutes later), which kind of makes your theory irrelevant.

I would ask all three of you what you think the legal standing of a 'false' or 'unfair' trip advisor review is in light of your definition of forgery, e.g. from an unfriendly competitor pretending to be a member of the public who has visited the restaurant/ hotel ?

WestmorlandSausage · 08/07/2014 22:21

OP, the 'solicitor' and the 'criminal lawyer' can no more prove that they are who they say they are than I can prove I am a farmer.

AmateurDad · 08/07/2014 22:29

@Sausage

I don't think a web page could be described as a document and furthermore I am not sure that such a review would be "telling a lie about itself" - a prerequisite for forgery - although you could make the same argument, perhaps, about the OP's situation.

Swipe left for the next trending thread