Is this libellous

[hotrodgal]

Hi all,

I wrote this in a letter to a Village Hall Secretary and they are now accussing me of Libellous. Can anyone please confirm if they are right.

This is the offending sentence.

"I believe it is being built for personal gain and that is why no other options have been fully explored."

Thank you in advance

 

[army judge]

It may be offensive to someone.

It isn't libelous.

It doesn't appear to be actionable.

If they sue you, just defend.

Until they sue you, ignore them.

 

[hotrodgal]

Thank you.

Also, do you see that sentence as fact or opinion? and if I wrote the letter to one person is it in fact libellous (it's not my fault if they showed others)? and last one don't they have to prove it's written about them and can they do that with what was wrote?

Thank you again in advance i am finding this very helpful.

 

[Proserpina]

UK defamation laws do vary quite considerably to US laws - I think OP should have a chat with a solicitor in the UK.

 

[fredrikklaw]

Do me a favor, love!

HOTRODGAL:

It would be an absolute waste of your valuable time and intelligence to wonder or worry about the libel accusation from the erstwhile "Village Secretary" and when it comes right down to the nitty-gritty of the matter, you will find out that the secretary is, as the English saying goes "All mouth and no trousers!"

These days, every Tom, Dick, and Harry feels libeled or slandered if you so much as comment on how they sugar their coffee, or tea as the case may be, which is quite sad really, because what they are feeling is not so much defamation as it is delusions of grandeur and self importance as well as being a complete ignoramus as to the very meaning of the words they spew or where they are doing it.

Does the secretary not know that the libel and slander market in England is cornered by and revolves around The Sun, The Daily Mirror, Queen of England, members of parliament, Elton John, and Tom Cruise who seem to be perpetually going in and out of the High Court.

And I digress…

Anyways, the sentence in question is as far from being libelous as I am from the Presidency of the United States and you are quite correct in saying that it is nonetheless your opinion which (I presumed) was expressed within a certain context of the local politics. And besides, for a valid cause of action sounding in defamation, someone somewhere must have suffered damages going to the character and other related "general" damages which here there are none except a bruised ego which by itself is not actionable.

In sum, as they say, FORGET IT! Your accuser is in the immortal words of Del Trotter, a complete plunker.

fredrikklaw

 

[Proserpina]

Plonker, fred. Plonker.



(Though I really did get a kick out of that post )

 

[army judge]

Plonker, fred. Plonker.



(Though I really did get a kick out of that post )

I always enjoy his posts.
He also offers sound legal advice!

 

[hotrodgal]

Thank you. That is what I thought but wanted to be sure. They are trying to intimidate me so I won't carry on trying to save the wildlife where they want to build the new Village Hall.

They also want an apology for that sentence I wouldn't normally reply but I need to ask for copies of minutes that were taken at an open meeting. Obviously I don't want to apologise that's why I want to get my facts right. I also don't want to wind them up (to much) as they will try and use it to discredit me. The committee do talk down to me as I am against there plans to build a new hall on wildlife.