Perhaps the real world is not so full of politically correct, sue happy, daily mail reading idiots afterall.

Wow politically correct, daily mail reading idiots eh? Think you have got a bit mixed up there. The correct newspaper preference generalisation in that case would have been The Guardian 🙂

But he has a high rez digital picture now that he can spend the evening examining and then come up with identifying features!

uplink, I got the delivery. the courier looked rather embarrassed

[quote]Don't know why she looked embarrassed [/quote]

Just a guess but…

it was a seatpost wrapped in brown paper?

I am a lawyer. We have a word to describe such actions – "defamation"

shouldn't you be overcharging someone for this advice?

Just call the police, stop taking stupid pictures and putting them online you mong.

well Mr lawyer – I hope you manage to deliver fee paying advice without the name calling – how old are you?

anyway, sue away, I have insurance 🙂

ha ha you silly silly man! you might want to read the terms of your "insurance" that somehow covers you for all the stupid and illegal actions that you do. you truly are a muppet.

this is the t'internet, i can name call all I like. It's like therapy.

Is that yoohoo999 in the original picture?

ha ha you silly silly man! you might want to read the terms of your "insurance" that somehow covers you for all the stupid and illegal actions that you do. you truly are a muppet.

this is the t'internet, i can name call all I like. It's like therapy.

I see you've set aside this special time to humiliate yourself in public
You're as sharp as a marble, you are

yup, i'm finding it quite enjoyable actually. nice to see so many people completely ignorant of basic principles of law. keeps me in a job

i'd love to see this insurance policy that covers your legal fees and damages payable as a result of libel….you don't happen to have a copy handy do you? they sound like great insurers!

Just call the police, stop taking stupid pictures and putting them online you mong.

Yeah, and why don't you get back to churning out boiler plate letters and charging people £100 for the privilege?

And how did you know the OP has Down's syndrome? Or does "mong" mean something different to alleged 'lawyers'?

lol with baw jaws 😆

The bit I'm not clear on is has your insurance paid out for the bike when it was stolen?

If it has then technically it's not your bike it's theirs.

If not then liberate away I'd say

i haven't drafted a letter in years, this is 2009, we use email.

also, boiler plate generally refers to provisions in a contract, not letters. but then again, you weren't to know that, full marks for effort.

£100? you wouldn't get much for that really. that's about 3 units of time. i can't even take a wee in 3 units.

The bit I'm not clear on is has your insurance paid out for the bike when it was stolen?

nah, the excess is £250 so I didn't bother

oops – see below 🙂

Catch him hold out his right hand and drop a rock/brick
on it.
Sure wont do it again

Blimey, the Leeds branch of Carter-Ruck's struggling a bit.

But the lawyer chap does have a point about the defamation, even if he expresses it in a way that makes him look like an idiot

actually ian, i don't work in litigation at all, it's the kind of basic stuff that they teach you at school being discussed here though, so i thought i would throw in my 2p worth.

i'm actually a finance lawyer. does that make me even worse? i hope so! ooooooh, this is exciting stuff!

Like everyone else, I used to take a dim view of lawyers. But this thread is really challenging my prejudices.

seven, i express it in a way that entertains me. just look at the reactions, it's beautiful.

i can't even take a wee in 3 units

No, I suppose not but we'd have the benefit of knowing that the best part of you was gone 😉

Why would you hope that it makes you worse?

because i'm enjoying the responses so far, if i had responded to all those without a clue in a patient and friendly manner it would have taken me far longer and been far less interesting for me 😆

i can't even take a wee in 3 units

Presumably because you are absolutely full of piss?

No, I suppose not but we'd have the benefit of knowing that the best part of you was gone

finally, a bit of sharp wit! I applaud that. 8)

i love forums like this, I actually came on here with the intention of saving you from a bit of potential grief, but your attitude to the repercussions of your actions was so arrogant that it made it more approriate for me to point out that you were being stupid rather than misguided.

you can judge me all you like from a few posts, but at the end of the day, I am correct. I offered some (I admit, harshly worded) advice, and you have chosen to completely ignore it. That's your perogative.

I wish you all the best in recovering you bike and genuinely hope that the chap in the photo doesn't own a bike remarkably similar to yours and shares the same love of MTB and frequents the STW forum (only to find himself in a photo, being branded a thief).

😉

I'm only being an @rse because it's just tooooooo easy right now

Anyone know this person?

because i'm enjoying the responses so far,

We're certainly enjoying your responses.

So once again… what exactly would the girls in the shop be suing him for?

Seven, An easy arse apparently.

wow, well done seven, you found my pinkbike account. amazing bit of detective work there.

Can this woman sue me for saying she looks a bit odd?

thanks 🙂

uplink's proving a bit harded for some reason or another 😕

So once again… what exactly would the girls in the shop be suing him for?

Title of thread = "Photo of a bike thief"

I can see three people in that photo, with the alleged stolen bike in the foreground.

I can see three people in that photo, with the alleged stolen bike in the foreground.

and in context, in the first post, clearly stated by the OP

this is my bike that was stolen on June 24th
The guy in the window is the one that was riding it

Again, what would the two girls in the photo (or the shop owner as you threw in in your original post) be claiming damages for?

[Edit] How have they been libelled?[/Edit]

Title of thread = "Photo of a bike thief"

I can see three people in that photo, with the alleged stolen bike in the foreground.

Uplink clearly stated in the initial post that:

The guy in the window is the one that was riding it

Google "reading for comprehension".

uplink's proving a bit harded for some reason or another

I don't think I have this logon anywhere else, maybe, but I don't think so

Good luck liberating your bike back, let us know how you get on 😉

You're not a lawyer, you're a dreadful, dreadful liar. You're also a complete tool, and extremely entertaining. Please keep it up.

Can I expect a lawsuit?

You're not a lawyer, you're a dreadful, dreadful liar.

He's clearly an expert on wild and unsubstantiated allegations… 🙂

crispedwheel – Member

I can see three people in that photo, with the alleged stolen bike in the foreground.

and in context, in the first post, clearly stated by the OP

this is my bike that was stolen on June 24th
The guy in the window is the one that was riding it

Again, what would the two girls in the photo (or the shop owner as you threw in in your original post) be claiming damages for?

[Edit] How have they been libelled?[/Edit]

there is also this bit

Well OK he might not be the one that lifted it

and the papers have been using this type of writing to call people things for years.