|
|
|
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
|
|
Beachcroft LLP Fest In this section, we feature the life and times of Beachcroft LLP previously known as Beachcroft Wansborough. Regular readers will know that we recently featured the mysterious death of Ralph Winstanley (click here to read the article). Unsatisfied with the treatment her father received, and even less satisified with Doncaster Primary Care Trust's response to her complaint, Ms Charlotte Peters Rock and her sister took the logical next step of making their dissatisfaction, and the reasons for it, know to the public via the internet. Sadly, the Trust does not appear to have taken kindly to the possibility that the public might read of Ms Peters Rock's grievances, and duly instructed their solicitors, Beachcroft LLP, to intervene on their behalf. Leaping into action with characteristic enthusiasm, Beachcroft LLP dispatched the following letters.
Interestingly, these missives, whilst sounding resolutely formal and authoritative - the sort of thing that might well persuade the man in the street to do exactly what the author wanted - don't seem to conform incredibly closely to the standard letter before claim template set out in the definitive Gatley on Libel and Slander. Specifically, the first letter does not identify which material on the website is allegedly defamatory, nor does it set out the nature of the alleged defamation, the words complained of, and what, in their "natural and ordinary meaning" they "meant and were understood to mean". Such matters may be a mere technicallity, but one would expect a large - and expensive - law firm to know how to prepare a letter before claim that follows the appropriate pre-action protocol. Moreover, the first letter stridently demands that any and all references to Doncaster Primary Care Trust and its employees be removed from Ms Peters Rock's website, and says that legal action may ensue if this is not done. No attempt is made to explain what legal action may be forthcoming, or the basis upon which it is threatened. Perhaps Beachcroft LLP would be kind enough to explain to our readers how a website, or its operator, could realistically face legal action simply for mentioning a person or organisation - particularly a very public organisation such as Doncaster Primary Care Trust? Of course, content that is genuinely defamatory is actionable, but it is difficult to see how the mere mention of an organisation could be defamatory - or, indeed, actionable in any other way. Yet this is exactly what Beachcroft LLP, on behalf of the Trust, insisted that Ms Peters Rock should not do. In February 2007, Beachcroft LLP wrote again to Ms Peters Rock, advising her that their client, Doncaster PCT, considered her to be a vexatious complainant, and would not enter into any correspondence with her. The situation can, therefore, be summarised as follows: Doncaster PCT will not communicate with Ms Peters Rock, and, with the assistance of their solicitors, Beachcroft LLP, they have sought to prevent her from publicising her grievances via the internet under a nebulous threat of legal action. Is Beachcroft LLP attempting to silence a legitimate complaint, and prevent their freedom of expression, for the benefit of their client? One would certainly hope not - solicitors are, after all, officers of the court, and are obliged to act accordingly. Note: NHS Exposed will treat any and all correspondence received in respect of this matter as material to be published in its entirety, regardless of any requests / demands therein to the contrary.
|
|
|
|
|
[Home] [NHS Exposed] [Patients] [Health Workers] [NHS in Crisis] [Legal Issues] [Media] [Helpdesk] [Public Views] All copyright remains with original authors unless otherwise stated. |
