Yes I have seen the letters, photos of, from two different people, and a third has given details of their letter, who it was written by, etc, which marry up with what I have seen. I personally wouldn't be intimidated as the tone is unprofessional in the extreme, but I appreciate that I have the hide of a rhino when it comes to this stuff, and that other people take it a lot more seriously!(I wasn't vetted when I joined the group, I made a separate profile with one photo of me, a different name (because of my profession), no info and nothing on my timeline so I could've been a catfish.)"
I wasn't referring to the style group when I said vetted but the breastfeeding groups. We vetted members to make sure they weren't men or strange people wanting to read about boobs
"You said you'd spoken personally to people sent letters, do you mean in person? Or online?"
Both. I have spoken to a couple on Messenger video, and have messaged with people on Mumsnet who have gotten in touch with me about the letters.
"And that you'd seen the letters. The contents of the letters discussed on here before don't match up with what was just claimed in Susie's statement. With what I know, the legal threats people were talking about really were laughable to me and I couldn't understand what they were scared of (although I know any legal looking letter can be intimidating if you don't know the system well).
Styled By Susie #3 Silence by Susie, Patreon fail, she'll write it all up in the Daily Mail
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
I have no legal background but I would suspect under GDPR that mumsnet can only give out usernames if requested by the police with a warrant (or something like that).
oops some of my reply I put in the quote to you, Notredamm, rather than all at the bottom. Sorry!
The identities who have deleted their posts across all platforms could technically belong to the same two people. My questions are: why if they are genuine agree to do this? And why have the people who left negative TP reviews under their real names, not also receive a letter?
Argh. What a shitshow.
Argh. What a shitshow.
Not at all, sadly.
What utter tosh... SBS claimed screen shots before .. where were they then ? I don't believe this either sorry .
Are you sure? (Asking genuinely, not snarking!)
So Susie’s lawyer can contact MNHQ say “we want emails for every poster on the SBS threads because we suspect xyz” and MNHQ would provide?
Haha no worries I've read your replies. All very interesting, especially that you'd spoken on video to two and seen two letters.
I really need to take my work hat off and just enjoy the tattle now
I feel I'm becoming invested.Well I haven't seen them with my own two hands so I can't say they aren't doctored! But for my purposes, which has only been to provide a listening ear to people who are afraid, it was enough. Yes I could have been fooled, it is possible, but it would be a pretty elaborate hoax. I can't see why someone would go to that much effort.Haha no worries I've read your replies. All very interesting, especially that you'd spoken on video to two and seen two letters.
I really need to take my work hat off and just enjoy the tattle now
I'll hold my hands up and apologise if I'm wrong....but whatever shite she's selling now, I ain't buying 
Not if they frame it like that, no but certainly where MN were being sued themselves then would provide the info. It's happened in the past. And definitely in police cases, not just civil ones, which harassment comes under (criminal), then forums are obligated to help in the enquiries. We all agree to it signing up.
I guess I don’t think it has yet progressed far enough in this scenario for Mumsnet to release emails.
There’s no court case or anything officially legal occurring.
I completely understand that MN would provide emails if there was a court case or if someone was deemed to be at risk of harm. But if I found out they send SBS my email because she claimed we’re “bullying” her then I would be very pissed off!
Right. I looked at MN’s privacy policy! Excerpt below talks about sharing info with police and others:
Exceptional circumstances - safeguarding and official investigations
−
If there are obvious safeguarding reasons, or if we are contacted by the police about a possible breach of the law, we may share your personal information with public authorities without your permission. If we are compelled to do so by a court order, we will share your personal data to the extent specified in the order.
If there are compelling safeguarding considerations, we may share your data with public authorities without your permission. We understand 'compelling safeguarding considerations' to mean credible evidence of imminent risk of serious harm, especially to a child or vulnerable person.
In such circumstances, on the judgement of a senior person within Mumsnet and in consultation with the Data Protection Officer, we may proactively contact relevant authorities (the police or ambulance service, for example) and share any relevant data we have, such as location data, relevant posts, private messages, details of any children who might be at risk, and descriptions of the situation.
If contacted by the police about possible breaches of the law disclosed in posts, we may sometimes – on the judgement of a senior person within Mumsnet and in consultation with the Data Protection Officer – share your personal information with them. We will share your personal information if compelled to do so by a court order, for example under Section 5 of the 2013 Defamation Act.
It does look like there could be an open police case as well a civil one on the horizon.
It's too early for a court case as yet but that comes later on if at all.
I don't want to sound like I'm defending MN, just explaining that they can and have been compelled to share info in the past and it looks credible to me that they would.
They are on Susie's side, I realised that after I was banned for saying she'd been accused of bullying in the past.
Last edited:
Why are they on Susie's side though? So many of their members have been ripped off by her. I just don't understand.
I don’t know what to believe now tbh.
The lady who received a letter on the 6 month anniversary of her mum’s death seemed genuine to me.
The lady who received a letter on the 6 month anniversary of her mum’s death seemed genuine to me.
Don’t worry, it doesn’t sound like you’re defending them!
I understand why they are sometimes cautious and delete threads, after all it’s cheaper to avoid a legal battle, even when you know you’d win. But your ban seems unfair!
The thing is. SBS had 14k followers on FB and over 31k on Instagram but they’re threatened by TWO “trolls” (by their accounts).
So they’re so threatened by 2 people? That’s absolute bull.
I also find it unbelievable that that’s their focus when there are 81 average/poor/bad reviews on trustpilot. Thats 35%!
But the focus of the business isn’t on that. It’s on playing the victim and taking no responsibility for a shoddy service and their non-existent customer care.
I just can’t comprehend why, when you take into consideration those reviews and then overall feedback, fixing the problems and addressing this isn’t the focus and the most important thing?
So they’re so threatened by 2 people? That’s absolute bull.
I also find it unbelievable that that’s their focus when there are 81 average/poor/bad reviews on trustpilot. Thats 35%!
But the focus of the business isn’t on that. It’s on playing the victim and taking no responsibility for a shoddy service and their non-existent customer care.
I just can’t comprehend why, when you take into consideration those reviews and then overall feedback, fixing the problems and addressing this isn’t the focus and the most important thing?
BIB
Yes the MN thread had gone very quiet and things had certainly slowed down on this thread too.
Why not address the accusations whilst both threads were in full force?
Why wait until the threads had somewhat lost interest to post a statement?
All it’s done is bring SBS back to the forum members attention again...
I'm really confused by this. I felt that the lady who had lost her mum to Corona and received a letter sounded really credible. There were also one or two others who sounded credible too, although they didn't speak in as much detail but that seemed to be because they were scared of saying too much. Are we now to believe that they were all the same one or two women?
Does anyone else think this is something to do with the woman who said she sent the "why should I buy your product" email a few days ago?
What's terrible about the internet is that I now feel as though I need to see evidence to believe anyone's side on this - and that makes me feel really grubby
Does anyone else think this is something to do with the woman who said she sent the "why should I buy your product" email a few days ago?
What's terrible about the internet is that I now feel as though I need to see evidence to believe anyone's side on this - and that makes me feel really grubby
I knew something like this was going to happen.
When it gets a little quiet on these forums, Susie manages to throw something to get them active again. She just loves it
When it gets a little quiet on these forums, Susie manages to throw something to get them active again. She just loves it
- Status