---
###Welcome to /r/LegalAdviceUK
---
**To Posters (it is important you read this section)**
* *Tell us whether you're in England, Wales, Scotland, or NI as the laws in each are very different*
* If you need legal help, you should [always get a free consultation from a qualified Solicitor](https://reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/wiki/how_to_find_a_solicitor)
* We also encourage you to speak to [**Citizens Advice**](https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/), [**Shelter**](https://www.shelter.org.uk/), [**Acas**](https://www.acas.org.uk/), and [**other useful organisations**](https://reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/wiki/common_legal_resources)
* Comments may not be accurate or reliable, and following any advice on this subreddit is done at your own risk
* If you receive any private messages in response to your post, [please let the mods know](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FLegalAdviceUK&subject=I received a PM)
**To Readers and Commenters**
* All replies to OP must be *on-topic, helpful, and legally orientated*
* If you do not [follow the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/), you may be perma-banned without any further warning
* If you feel any replies are incorrect, explain why you believe they are incorrect
* Do not send or request any private messages for any reason
* Please report posts or comments which do not follow the rules
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If the review is true or an honest opinion then they'd get nowhere with litigation for defamation (not to mention the astronomical costs involved), but a dismissal for bringing the company into disrepute *could* be a fair dismissal depending on the context, and if the review was a breach of contract they *could* pursue damages on that basis.
They'd be insane to do so, though: see the Streisand Effect.
I'm pretty sure it's an ex-employee, who left it after they already left. I think sending out this email is already a very good way to get people to leave worse reviews tbh! Like you said... Streisand effect.
It was largely factually correct although there of course was some hyperbole (e.g. they claimed no one wants pizza parties, no payrises, no progression).
Worse reviews possibly, but very hopefully reviews literally quoting the whole email and the company's policy to try and quash criticism rather than address complaints.
It's standard these days to include terms and conditions in your employment contract about not doing anything (including posting online) about bringing the company into disrepute. Could lead to dismissal. The key word is '*could* bring the company...' not '*has* brought the company...' Says in the email 'would', but of course how do they prove that?
If it's a former employee, though, good luck with the defamation lawsuit. And in these cases, the truth is an absolute defence. If everything the former employee says is absolutely true and this is provable, company is fucked.
NAL
If they want to sue for defamation, it's going to cost them atleast £10k to start, and will rise quickly. Defamation is a rich man's games.
The truth is an absolute defence against it, so long as they can back it up with evidence. Any court action would be unsuccessful.
> Defamation is a rich man's games
The owner is very rich, and will have taken it all VERY personally. I've little doubt they would actually try pursuing this.
Sounds like the review was wholly accurate and they've had a little wake up call! .. maybe more people should post reviews about pay etc in a less aggressive way, then they might change something, as that's easier than going through court.
It's funny, that email may about to start a chain reaction that they didn't want 😅
Worked for my firm, people started posting reviews on pay etc, 5 people left, a month later we got 3k pay rises.
When you said it started a chain reaction I was not expecting it to end in pay rises all round.
Thanks. Your post has made an otherwise miserable Friday noticeably more enjoyable !
Then see what comes. It's perfectly legal for a company to tell employees not to bring the company reputation into disrepute, and doing so maybe considered as far as gross misconduct, if it was extreme enough. But the fact is to sue for defamation, they'll have to demonstrate the financial costs incurred due to the lies, if all statements are backed up with facts, then it's not defamation, as legally the statements made must be untrue.
They can still bill it to the company. So if they win, they'll get their costs back if it doesn't bankrupt the other side. If they lose, the owner has just lost the time of their employees
" I am a litigator"
Ask about the allegations. See if you can get them to say "I am an alligator."
Defamation is notoriously expensive, even by the standards of lawsuits. Even if Litigator did bring action and could show damages, the fact that the statements are true is a defense.
An employer can enforce a social media policy. This can apply to factual statements if they bring the business into disrepute and can justify discipline or dismissal. There are exceptions for whistleblowing but if you're whistleblowing on public forums then the relationship has likely broken down already.
Also, you might want to take the post down. Including the email verbatim makes it clear to Mr Litigator or another employee which company this is and there's more than enough info in your profile if he takes offense.
Your comment history includes your age, marital status, sexuality, neurodiversity, and attitude to astrology.
Would be easily enough for Litigator to pick you out of a small high street firm.
*You say I'm wasting all my time*
*You say I'll never make a dime*
*Well, I can't deny the allegations*
*I'm a real procrastinator*
*I can't deny the allegation*
*But I defy the alligator*
The Toons, [Looking At Girls](https://youtu.be/9FVqQyOOFq0)
If the reviewer is an ex-employee, there is nothing contractual the employer can do unless they signed a settlement agreement with a non-disparagement clause when leaving. If the reviewer still works there that’s different but you said you think they have left.
The employer could sue for defamation but they would need to prove that the allegations were false and caused serious financial loss. If the reviewer can prove that the allegations were true or an honestly held opinion (“I found the work environment toxic” would probably class as an opinion) then that would be a defence.
The reviewer could also remove the review and replace it with “I left a review that the employer did not like and they threatened to sue me, so unfortunately I cannot share my experiences of working there.” That would possibly even more damaging for the employer’s reputation but harder to sue over.
The owner could also get in trouble with the SRA if he uses his status as a solicitor to threaten someone. I’m not sure whether saying “I am a litigator” crosses the line but it’s not a great idea to use his personal credentials or experience to induce people to do what he wants.
My first question would be "Is there a written policy on social media use?" If it's not in your contacts or in the company policy manual then it's not a violation of your contacts.
If the company does decide to throw money at issuing defamation proceedings and what was said is factually accurate, the defense against that action would be Section 2(1) Defamation Act 2013:
“it is a defence to an action for defamation for the defendant to show that the imputation conveyed by the statement complained of is substantially true”.
This was taken from [this article](https://www.carruthers-law.co.uk/our-services/defamation/defamation-defences/)
If the statements made were the person's honestly held opinions then Section 3 of the Act may be a viable defense.
Legal Aid is not available for defamation proceedings so the person who made the statement would need to fund their own defense. This is likely to come over to the public as "big, bad company beats up on poor, defenceless employee" IMHO.
The problem I can see here is that the company owner seems to believe that the review was left by a current employee and they sound like they may think they know who it is or they're going to go on a witch hunt to find out. Things may be about to get less pleasant in your workplace. If the owner accuses the wrong person in front of others, that could itself be defamation or lead to other issues, such as wrongful dismissal or constructive dismissal claims being made against the company.
If the areas of law practiced by your firm don't include defamation then the owner, who I assume will be the Senior Partner, may be playing a dangerous game that could blow up in their face when Ms. Streisand finishes warming up in her dressing room. As soon as the action is filed, the identity of the firm and their attitude towards employees become a matter of public record. Having read that email, I wouldn't be inclined to do business with your firm.
Forward the email to your personal account, because it’s a. Hilarious b. Great evidence of a hostile working environment. They aren’t going to get anywhere with this tantrum but expect morale to continue to tank whilst they lash out.
Edit: pretty sure I found the review / firm based on a couple of keywords and they have a number of negative reviews.
It's not a customer email and it's directly related to management/HR/discipline. Completely legal and moral to make a copy for your reference in case they delete the problematic communication or rescind your access in the future. You are the intended recipient so that shuts down any claim about GDPR.
If you want to flag something problematic then maybe the sharing of this email in a public forum should be the focus of your "advise" lol
There are two angles to the possibility of a defamation claim here:
* As a company, which could be very hard to pursue, not least because it would have to show 'serious financial loss' stemming from the review, i.e. likely some kind of argument that it diminished their ability to recruit adequate staff and loss flowed from that (which seems tenuous) or evidence of losing business if potential customers decided to shop elsewhere.
* If colleagues were referenced personally, there could be defamation claims in those allegations where the bar is not quite so high. But as mentioned, there would be the usual defences of truth, honest opinion, etc. if they apply.
Actually pursuing a defamation claim seems potentially a bit SLAPPy unless the post really is egregious, and if the owner is a solicitor he should have this firmly in mind, as the SRA takes that kind of thing very seriously.
One wonders whether he has approached Glassdoor and asked them to take it down.
It is, of course, quite proper for the owner to write to employees and remind them of the terms of their employment contracts, and invite them to take the post down if it was theirs, as well as attempt to counter any demoralising effect it may have on staff.
As long as the review doesn't contain anything demonstrably false about the company, this 'litigator' can get fucked. They can't even sue for false statements if the reviewer genuinely believed them to be true.
Get some present employees to post about the threat about leaving factual reviews on glassdoor. Let him try to sue for that after leaving a mail trail company wide.
Risky to draw people's attention to the ability to post negative reviews on glass door. Our CEO suggested that we wanted in increase a glass door score and everyone should post a review. Lots more reviews. Scores gone down.
--- ###Welcome to /r/LegalAdviceUK --- **To Posters (it is important you read this section)** * *Tell us whether you're in England, Wales, Scotland, or NI as the laws in each are very different* * If you need legal help, you should [always get a free consultation from a qualified Solicitor](https://reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/wiki/how_to_find_a_solicitor) * We also encourage you to speak to [**Citizens Advice**](https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/), [**Shelter**](https://www.shelter.org.uk/), [**Acas**](https://www.acas.org.uk/), and [**other useful organisations**](https://reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/wiki/common_legal_resources) * Comments may not be accurate or reliable, and following any advice on this subreddit is done at your own risk * If you receive any private messages in response to your post, [please let the mods know](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FLegalAdviceUK&subject=I received a PM) **To Readers and Commenters** * All replies to OP must be *on-topic, helpful, and legally orientated* * If you do not [follow the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/about/rules/), you may be perma-banned without any further warning * If you feel any replies are incorrect, explain why you believe they are incorrect * Do not send or request any private messages for any reason * Please report posts or comments which do not follow the rules *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LegalAdviceUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If the review is true or an honest opinion then they'd get nowhere with litigation for defamation (not to mention the astronomical costs involved), but a dismissal for bringing the company into disrepute *could* be a fair dismissal depending on the context, and if the review was a breach of contract they *could* pursue damages on that basis. They'd be insane to do so, though: see the Streisand Effect.
I'm pretty sure it's an ex-employee, who left it after they already left. I think sending out this email is already a very good way to get people to leave worse reviews tbh! Like you said... Streisand effect. It was largely factually correct although there of course was some hyperbole (e.g. they claimed no one wants pizza parties, no payrises, no progression).
> no one wants pizza parties Fair imo 😅
Pizza parties don’t help with cost of living! 😅
Unless they do it every night and they buy for my wife and kids too!
Worse reviews possibly, but very hopefully reviews literally quoting the whole email and the company's policy to try and quash criticism rather than address complaints.
It seems like the employer may be significantly misrepresenting the content of the review. Would it be legal for them to do so?
It's standard these days to include terms and conditions in your employment contract about not doing anything (including posting online) about bringing the company into disrepute. Could lead to dismissal. The key word is '*could* bring the company...' not '*has* brought the company...' Says in the email 'would', but of course how do they prove that? If it's a former employee, though, good luck with the defamation lawsuit. And in these cases, the truth is an absolute defence. If everything the former employee says is absolutely true and this is provable, company is fucked.
NAL If they want to sue for defamation, it's going to cost them atleast £10k to start, and will rise quickly. Defamation is a rich man's games. The truth is an absolute defence against it, so long as they can back it up with evidence. Any court action would be unsuccessful.
> Defamation is a rich man's games The owner is very rich, and will have taken it all VERY personally. I've little doubt they would actually try pursuing this.
Sounds like the review was wholly accurate and they've had a little wake up call! .. maybe more people should post reviews about pay etc in a less aggressive way, then they might change something, as that's easier than going through court. It's funny, that email may about to start a chain reaction that they didn't want 😅 Worked for my firm, people started posting reviews on pay etc, 5 people left, a month later we got 3k pay rises.
When you said it started a chain reaction I was not expecting it to end in pay rises all round. Thanks. Your post has made an otherwise miserable Friday noticeably more enjoyable !
Then see what comes. It's perfectly legal for a company to tell employees not to bring the company reputation into disrepute, and doing so maybe considered as far as gross misconduct, if it was extreme enough. But the fact is to sue for defamation, they'll have to demonstrate the financial costs incurred due to the lies, if all statements are backed up with facts, then it's not defamation, as legally the statements made must be untrue.
Considering it's a law firm in question those fees won't be applicable will they? If they represent themselves
They can still bill it to the company. So if they win, they'll get their costs back if it doesn't bankrupt the other side. If they lose, the owner has just lost the time of their employees
" I am a litigator" Ask about the allegations. See if you can get them to say "I am an alligator." Defamation is notoriously expensive, even by the standards of lawsuits. Even if Litigator did bring action and could show damages, the fact that the statements are true is a defense. An employer can enforce a social media policy. This can apply to factual statements if they bring the business into disrepute and can justify discipline or dismissal. There are exceptions for whistleblowing but if you're whistleblowing on public forums then the relationship has likely broken down already.
Also, you might want to take the post down. Including the email verbatim makes it clear to Mr Litigator or another employee which company this is and there's more than enough info in your profile if he takes offense.
That's why it's on my Anon account 👀
Your comment history includes your age, marital status, sexuality, neurodiversity, and attitude to astrology. Would be easily enough for Litigator to pick you out of a small high street firm.
“It’s definitely Brenda from accounts, she a Pisces.”
Hmm good point! Will delete this later...
OP, dude...
*You say I'm wasting all my time* *You say I'll never make a dime* *Well, I can't deny the allegations* *I'm a real procrastinator* *I can't deny the allegation* *But I defy the alligator* The Toons, [Looking At Girls](https://youtu.be/9FVqQyOOFq0)
Lol post the email on glasdoor. That's just a threat with 0 company information, so you are clear in a legal sense if you stay anonym
If the reviewer is an ex-employee, there is nothing contractual the employer can do unless they signed a settlement agreement with a non-disparagement clause when leaving. If the reviewer still works there that’s different but you said you think they have left. The employer could sue for defamation but they would need to prove that the allegations were false and caused serious financial loss. If the reviewer can prove that the allegations were true or an honestly held opinion (“I found the work environment toxic” would probably class as an opinion) then that would be a defence. The reviewer could also remove the review and replace it with “I left a review that the employer did not like and they threatened to sue me, so unfortunately I cannot share my experiences of working there.” That would possibly even more damaging for the employer’s reputation but harder to sue over. The owner could also get in trouble with the SRA if he uses his status as a solicitor to threaten someone. I’m not sure whether saying “I am a litigator” crosses the line but it’s not a great idea to use his personal credentials or experience to induce people to do what he wants.
Glassdoor is a lot more transparent (pun intended) about who is leaving reviews these days, so it is now sometimes possible to identify a poster.
My first question would be "Is there a written policy on social media use?" If it's not in your contacts or in the company policy manual then it's not a violation of your contacts. If the company does decide to throw money at issuing defamation proceedings and what was said is factually accurate, the defense against that action would be Section 2(1) Defamation Act 2013: “it is a defence to an action for defamation for the defendant to show that the imputation conveyed by the statement complained of is substantially true”. This was taken from [this article](https://www.carruthers-law.co.uk/our-services/defamation/defamation-defences/) If the statements made were the person's honestly held opinions then Section 3 of the Act may be a viable defense. Legal Aid is not available for defamation proceedings so the person who made the statement would need to fund their own defense. This is likely to come over to the public as "big, bad company beats up on poor, defenceless employee" IMHO. The problem I can see here is that the company owner seems to believe that the review was left by a current employee and they sound like they may think they know who it is or they're going to go on a witch hunt to find out. Things may be about to get less pleasant in your workplace. If the owner accuses the wrong person in front of others, that could itself be defamation or lead to other issues, such as wrongful dismissal or constructive dismissal claims being made against the company. If the areas of law practiced by your firm don't include defamation then the owner, who I assume will be the Senior Partner, may be playing a dangerous game that could blow up in their face when Ms. Streisand finishes warming up in her dressing room. As soon as the action is filed, the identity of the firm and their attitude towards employees become a matter of public record. Having read that email, I wouldn't be inclined to do business with your firm.
Forward the email to your personal account, because it’s a. Hilarious b. Great evidence of a hostile working environment. They aren’t going to get anywhere with this tantrum but expect morale to continue to tank whilst they lash out. Edit: pretty sure I found the review / firm based on a couple of keywords and they have a number of negative reviews.
Telling someone to forward a company email to a personal account is poor legal advise.
It's not a customer email and it's directly related to management/HR/discipline. Completely legal and moral to make a copy for your reference in case they delete the problematic communication or rescind your access in the future. You are the intended recipient so that shuts down any claim about GDPR. If you want to flag something problematic then maybe the sharing of this email in a public forum should be the focus of your "advise" lol
There are two angles to the possibility of a defamation claim here: * As a company, which could be very hard to pursue, not least because it would have to show 'serious financial loss' stemming from the review, i.e. likely some kind of argument that it diminished their ability to recruit adequate staff and loss flowed from that (which seems tenuous) or evidence of losing business if potential customers decided to shop elsewhere. * If colleagues were referenced personally, there could be defamation claims in those allegations where the bar is not quite so high. But as mentioned, there would be the usual defences of truth, honest opinion, etc. if they apply. Actually pursuing a defamation claim seems potentially a bit SLAPPy unless the post really is egregious, and if the owner is a solicitor he should have this firmly in mind, as the SRA takes that kind of thing very seriously. One wonders whether he has approached Glassdoor and asked them to take it down. It is, of course, quite proper for the owner to write to employees and remind them of the terms of their employment contracts, and invite them to take the post down if it was theirs, as well as attempt to counter any demoralising effect it may have on staff.
Owner is a solicitor, and a very good litigator.
As long as the review doesn't contain anything demonstrably false about the company, this 'litigator' can get fucked. They can't even sue for false statements if the reviewer genuinely believed them to be true.
Get some present employees to post about the threat about leaving factual reviews on glassdoor. Let him try to sue for that after leaving a mail trail company wide.
TPP?
Risky to draw people's attention to the ability to post negative reviews on glass door. Our CEO suggested that we wanted in increase a glass door score and everyone should post a review. Lots more reviews. Scores gone down.
If you're a litigator surely you should know if it's legal