• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

McGill's Owners Bankrupt Blogger

Status
Not open for further replies.

GordonT

Member
Joined
26 May 2018
Messages
509
An interesting illustration of why forum admins are right to get a bit jumpy if a post maligns a company or its representatives without compelling justification.

From "Daily Record" online article dated 5 May 2024 by Norman Silvester

Link: Billionaire McGill's bus tycoons bankrupt blogger over 'gangster' claims - Daily Record


Billionaire McGill's bus tycoons bankrupt blogger over 'gangster' claims

Former Rangers directors Sandy and James Easdale were awarded £200,000 each at the Court of Session in Edinburgh in May last year against Paul Hendry, who falsely accused them of being involved in organised crime.

Two billionaire bus tycoons have bankrupted a blogger who falsely accused them of being involved in organised crime.

Former Rangers directors Sandy Easdale, 56, and brother James, 53, were awarded £200,000 each at the Court of Session in Edinburgh in May last year against Paul Hendry.

But none of the £400,000 compensation has so far been paid to the Easdales, who own McGill’s Buses of Greenock.

That led the brothers to last week raise the action against Hendry at Hastings County Court in Sussex to recover the six figure sum plus interest.

At a brief hearing on Monday, the bankruptcy order was granted by a judge. Hendry, who suffers from ill health and is housebound, did not attend or contest the bankruptcy.

The order has since been passed to the Official Receiver, who has the power in England to sell any of his assets to pay the compensation award.

This could include Hendry’s home in Eastbourne, Sussex. The 60-year-old, who did not have legal representation at the bankruptcy hearing, previously admitted being on benefits and in arrears with his mortgage.

Hendry, who uses the pseudonym Art Hostage, called the Easdales "gangsters" in posts on social media in March last year. The brothers raised the damages action against Hendry at the Court of Session in Edinburgh two months later.

Hendry was ordered to take down posts and videos carrying the derogatory claims and not repeat them. He was summoned back to court after he repeated the allegations on social media in November and December.

At a hearing in February, he was found guilty of contempt of court by Lord Braid, who had issued the original ban and damages award. Hendry appeared via a video link and represented himself. He apologised to the brothers.

Lord Braid deferred sentence on Hendry for six months. He warned the blogger if he didn’t comply with the court order preventing him from repeating the allegations he could expect a custodial sentence.

The Easdale’s adviser, Jack Irvine said: "This sends out a message to those deranged fantasists who would use the internet to lie and damage reputations and to cause distress to innocent families.

"We will pursue these types of people to the ends of the earth. You have been warned." It was the second time in less than a year Hendry has found himself in court over his crime blogs.

In August, he was found guilty of harassment at Wirral Magistrates Court in Merseyside, by using social media to wrongly accuse a local man of being a "drug and gun lord".

Hendry was fined £250 and ordered to pay compensation. Hendry declined to comment last week when contacted by the Sunday Mail.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Haywain

Veteran Member
Joined
3 Feb 2013
Messages
15,546
An interesting illustration of why forum admins are right to get a bit jumpy if a post maligns a company or its representatives without compelling justification.
Did the blogger malign a company or its representatives, or two individuals? You could just as easily say that those libelled were representatives of Rangers FC and that company had been maligned, unless there was specific context in what was said to link them with McGills.
 

Volvodart

Established Member
Joined
12 Jun 2010
Messages
2,403
I think this was the person responsible for the old Bloodbus (?) forum ceasing to exist, so he has been at it for a long time.
 

GordonT

Member
Joined
26 May 2018
Messages
509
Did the blogger malign a company or its representatives, or two individuals? You could just as easily say that those libelled were representatives of Rangers FC and that company had been maligned, unless there was specific context in what was said to link them with McGills.
That may be true in this case. However it illustrates how easily someone who might seek to wrongfully target a transport entity on a forum such as this can get their fingers burned.
 

Taunton

Established Member
Joined
1 Aug 2013
Messages
10,154
It's notable this can be the outcome of using this word, whereas Roger Ford has long labelled TOCs owned by the major bus groups as the "Bus Bandits", similar term, with no comeback.
 

TheGrandWazoo

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Feb 2013
Messages
20,113
Location
Somerset with international travel (e.g. across th
It's notable this can be the outcome of using this word, whereas Roger Ford has long labelled TOCs owned by the major bus groups as the "Bus Bandits", similar term, with no comeback.
I'd imagine that context is all important.

It is a salutary lesson that freedom of speech also comes with responsibilities and does show why moderators do intervene.
 

GusB

Established Member
Associate Staff
Buses & Coaches
Joined
9 Jul 2016
Messages
6,683
Location
Elginshire
I'd imagine that context is all important.

It is a salutary lesson that freedom of speech also comes with responsibilities and does show why moderators do intervene.
Quite. There's a difference between making a general comment about "bus bandits" and specifically labelling two people as gangsters.

We've already had comments on the forum about the individuals concerned and we've removed them; not because we're trying to curtail anyone's freedom of speech, but primarily because we don't want anyone getting sued. £400,000 is a life-ruining sum of money!

It's also why we insist that people provide sources when making allegations and accusations. If an individual or organisation has been up to no good and it's a matter of public record, by all means discuss it here as long as you can provide the relevant reference.
 

Haywain

Veteran Member
Joined
3 Feb 2013
Messages
15,546
We've already had comments on the forum about the individuals concerned and we've removed them; not because we're trying to curtail anyone's freedom of speech, but primarily because we don't want anyone getting sued. £400,000 is a life-ruining sum of money!
It is life-changing for most people but it does help to (a) apologise when given the chance and (b) not repeat your comments. It appears the blogger got a much worse result because of those elements.

An alternative point of view is that it doesn't matter what evidence you have on someone if you cant afford to back it up in court. The power definitely belongs to those with money.
 

Statto

Established Member
Joined
8 Feb 2011
Messages
3,242
Location
At home or at the pub
Notable the blogger ended up being found guilty of harassment after falsely accusing someone else of being a drug & gun lord, wonder how many more people the blogger has wrongly accused of being involved in crime, but the people haven't had the resources to hold him to account.

With free speech comes responsibility of what you say & consequences for false accusations, some feel once they're on the net they can start accusing anyone without any impunity.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top