Legal recourse against writing companies who fail to pay their writers

I have been reading several posts over the last few weeks advising writers and customers of potential legal action against writing companies who do not pay or do not deliver work or deliver work of substandard quality and have decided that its time to set the record straight (least in respect of the position in the UK).

Some have suggested claims through the small claims court- this raises the following inherent difficulty

1) issues in relation to jurisdiction- as many of the companies responsible for cheating writers are not based in the UK they are not covered by UK legislation and therefore not subject to the same rules. This then poses a problem for the courts as to whether a claim can be substantiated against the company

2) proof- it can be virtually impossible to prove that the work submitted by the writer was of good quality or that the company did not receive a complaint of plagiarism or poor quality

3) cost of bringing an action- claims can only be heard in the small claims court for amounts under £1000. Depending on the amount claimed the price of the action increases. Given that proving the claim can be difficult as well as the jurisdiction issues many cannot afford to risk paying for initiating the action in case they lose.

A further issue that might also apply in some cases, is that as the industry is based on self employment the companies instruct the writers on the need to disclose their earnings to the Inland Revenue. I suspect that there are some out there who feel that since they are not officially attending a workplace, and that many can write for these companies without anyone knowing that they are doing so, that some have opted not to disclose their earnings to tht taxman. None of the writing companies demand proof that a writer has declared their earnings and merely reminds them of the responibility to do so. For those who have neglected to inform the tax office bringing an action in the courts will reveal their undisclosed earnings and could lead to them facing their own court action for fraud. As many writers are students using the income to subsidise their university grants I doubt that many have made such disclosure to the tax office so therefore when they do get taken for a ride by these companies they are unable to bring an action.

These companies have realised that many do not declare their earnings and this is why they are so confident that they can withhold the money the writer is entitled to without fear of an action being raised against them in the court.

It has also been pointed out that many writers are international students that are here on visas and are fearful of bringing an action in case they have breached the terms of their visa. I suspect that many of these writers have either chosen not to declare their earnings to the Inland revenue, or have not known how to disclose this information and so have errantly not disclosed their earnings. The introduction of self assessment in the UK has caused problems since its inception as it is not easy to complete. I know of many professional persons who have struggled with completion of the forms and have had to employ accountants to assist, so the ordinary lay person will find it a mine field to complete. For this reason many might consider their earnings to be undiscoverable or of such a minimal level that they will risk not getting caught for failing to disclose.

Bringing a legal action in UK is unlikely to succeed, is likely to cost the applicant money they do not have and could expose the writer to legal charges against themselves. the bet form of action would be to discontinue working for the company once there has been a problem receiving payment and put your losses down to experience, or don't start working for these companies in the first place. Learn from the experience of others and try to find companies that will pay for your time and efforts.

Essay Writers Recourse - look this discussion up.

WB, your hyper link which refers to this link https://essayscam.org/forum/wc/revenge-essaywriters-818/ is actually about "How to get revenge on essaywriters.net[DND*]" it does not refer to the issue and proposed procedure on the alleged acts of P.R. found in this thread https://essayscam.org/forum/es/projectstclass-peter-richardson-808/2/ and entitled "Project1stclass, Peter Richardson."

Anyway, perhaps I did not understand the connection, then my apology.

Let me just reiterate that immediately writing to websites (and may I quote you) "Tell your story--including an account of your personal experience and EVIDENCE from this forum--and the site owners will REMOVE the backlinks!" can be construed as tortious interference with a contractual relationship in cases where these backlinks are paid or rented because they are considered proprietary interests. An act of another which unlawfully interferes with the enjoyment of personal property is a tort for which an action shall lie.


The proposed procedure appearing in the thread https://essayscam.org/forum/es/projectstclass-peter-richardson-808/ refers to fees which lawfully were earned but with finality--allegedly withheld from the writers by the LLC concerned.

It does not refer to the delivery of substandard product nor the failure to make any delivery at all. Please further note that the idea of HMCS came from a member, Dylan with his post to that effect found at https://essayscam.org/forum/es/stclassprojects-qualityresultsltd-28/.


The name of the entity was mentioned by member, MAK in his post dated 30 December 2008, 10:12 am, as Anagram Ltd or Quality Results Ltd. I personally verified from the Companies House the registration of these entities in UK.

Thus, the jurisdictional issue which you raised has been amply satisfied.


Please do not preempt what the aggrieved writers may have in their possession as evidence. No one is privy to their evidence yet.


I would have to disagree with you. The USER GUIDE for HMCSspecifies the following conditions in bringing forth a complaint for the money claims:
(quoted verbatim in part)
" claim may be started using Money Claim Online if it meets all the following conditions -
(1) the only remedy claimed is a specified amount of money -
(a) less than £100,000 (excluding any interest or costs claimed); and
(b) in sterling;"

Therefore the amount involved in the money claim is less than £100,000or £99,999.99 and NOT as you claimed "for amounts under £1000."

Anent costs for bringing forth a complaint--the USER MANUAL specifies the following:
(quoted verbatim in part)
"Where this practice direction provides for a fee to be paid electronically, it may be paid by -
(1) credit card;
(2) debit card; or
(3) any other method which the Court Service may permit.
3.2A step may only be taken using Money Claim Online on payment of the prescribed fee. The County Court Fees Order 1999 provides that parties may, in certain circumstances, be exempt from payment of fees, or may be entitled to apply for fees to be remitted or reduced.The Court Service website contains guidance as to when this entitlement arises. A claimant who wishes to claim exemption from payment of fees, or to apply for remission or reduction of fees, may not use Money Claim Online and should issue his claim at a court office."

I have requested the HMCS to forward to me the instances where complainants are exempted from the payment of filing fees.


Again I have to disagree. It is not based on self employment. Have you read the LLC's TOW? I believe not.

I will quote the information from the UK Government website relative to definitions of the terms "employee," "worker," and "self-employed" as:

"Employee
The majority of people in work are employees. You're classed as an employee if you're working under a contract of employment. A contract need not be in writing - it exists when you and your employer agree terms and conditions of employment. It can also be implied from your actions and those of the person you are working for. Your contract will normally set out what you're expected to do. You'll usually be expected to do the work yourself - ie you can't send someone else to do your work for you.

Worker
This is a broader category than 'employees' but normally excludes those who are self-employed. A worker is any individual who works for an employer, whether under a contract of employment, or any other contract where an individual undertakes to do or perform personally any work or services. Workers are entitled to core employment rights and protections. The following groups of people are likely to be workers but not employees: most agency workers

short term casual workers
some freelancers
Self-employed
If you're self-employed, you do not have a contract of employment with an employer. You're more likely to be contracted to provide services over a certain period of time for a fee and be in business in your own right. You'll also pay your own tax and National Insurance Contributions (NIC).

You do not have employment rights as such if you're self-employed since you are your own boss and can therefore decide, for example, how much to charge for your work and how much holiday to give yourself. You do have some legal protection."

worksmart.org.uk/rights/i_work_through_an_agency_am_i - Another source of information:

"You are likely to be a worker if:

your employer only offers work as it is available, and you are hired to complete a task rather than attend between set hours
you can decide when you will work, and turn down work when offered
you can send someone else to do the work in your place if you want
you provide your own tools and equipment.
you do not have tax and National Insurance deducted from what is probably called a payment or fee rather than wages(though some workers do have deductions)."

(underscoring supplied)


Do you know that there is a CUT-OFF for those who need not declare their fees/income? Do you know the amount of the CUT-OFF? I guess not.


Perhaps because the writers are exempt from doing so.


Have you read the contents of a student visa? The basic conditions for a Tier 4?
I believe not.

BUT I DID--AND NOT ONLY that I personally spoke with officers of the UK Home Office, both from Immigration and the UK Border Agency. So, I feel that I know what I am doing. Besides, I have full faith that these aggrieved writers are intelligent enough to read and comprehend everything before deciding to make a "go" of their respective complaints.

I am wondering what motivated you to think and feel the way you do. If I would "listen" to what you are saying--I would feel that you sound like a "P.R." But of course, perhaps you are merely expressing your deep fears and concern for the aggrieved writers.





Cause of action is determined by the material allegations of actual and real facts. There is always peculiar element for every aggrieved writer in relation to his SOLE case/complaint. It cannot be determined by speculations, conjectures, or genalisations. Each complaint contains factual narration of events that transpired and NOT merely based on doubts or inkling. Short of any recital of facts sent to me and MAK (who identified himself to be a solicitor), any comment is a mere speculation or a call to discourage and preempt the aggrieved to seek redress.

And if were an aggrieved writer, I would just allow these people to kick me around--then I will whimper like a dog in one corner and tell myself, 'charge everything to experience.' Who cares about the rest of potential victims, I should not give a hoot.

But you see, I am not.

Generally, if there are not too many complaints, then perhaps some are truly just mere 'propaganda' but that does not detract from the fact that there were alleged violations of pertinent laws for which investigations of ALL are necessary.

By the way, I sent emails to WB and to this forum about a request to take web screen shots of the article in another thread. I have yet to receive a reply. Be that as it may, it is all right WB and Mod. I have sufficiently addressed the request. Thanks anyway. I have taken major steps already and I will be taking a few more till my adieu. Then I will watch.

Aggrieved writers,
These people capitalise and exploit your weaknesses both in terms of the lack of a built-in procedure to redress your grievances and vindicate your rights and the lack of sufficient knowledge of the rights and privileges granted to you by law.

They try to mislead you and threaten you with your fears which are based on your very own erroneous assumption of the weakness of your position.

It is your choice and prerogative to assert your rights or feel like 'losers' the rest of your life. Time to make a stand, time to 'put your foot down' or whimper in one corner.

A little lesson on English law for you voir-dire (and remember I do this for a living)

SMALL claims courts deal with issues UP to £5000 - hmcourts-service.gov.uk/courtfinder/forms/ex307.pdf
Fast track claims are for claimd between £5000 and £15000
Multi track claims are for claims between £15000 and £50000.

hmcourts-service.gov.uk/courtfinder/forms/ex305.pdf

I errantly put £1000 for small claims amounts in the first post, which is the maximum amount for claim for personal injuries in a small claims court.

You will see from the links how much it would cost a litigant to bring an action in each of these cases.


why not just read the online leaflet at the address below

hmcourts-service.gov.uk/courtfinder/forms/ex160a_e.pdf


I did say MOST companies inform the writers that they are employed on a freelance basis and as such are responsible for their own declaration of tax etc. for one such example see below

academicknowledge.com/tax-insurance.php


Tell that to the taxman.

guardian.co.uk/money/2003/oct/17/redundancy.finance

ec.europa.eu/youreurope/nav/en/citizens/working/taxation/uk/index_en.html

Note the section which states

You have an obligation to declare all your taxable income and capital gains to the Inland Revenue. All information relating to your tax affairs is kept at your local tax office.


Not so as you will see from the above ALL YOUR TAXABLE INCOME MUST be declared.


And I am a barrister hence know as much as , maybe more than Mak.


I have NO connection with ANY website and was instrumental in making sure Jennifer from UK essays was reported to the Law Society, the Bar Council and the FILEX for her blatant promotion of law students seeking assistance with their law school work- which by the way is a total breach of the professional ethics of the above societies.

As WB has pointed out many times- lots of these companies purport to be in the UK or the US and are actually based elsewhere. Companies registered through Companies House in UK CAN be pursued in the UK courts, however ANY court will require the APPLICANT to prove they are owed the money they are requesting. IF the essay writing company are claiming substandard work or plagiarism as the reason for withholding the fee then the applicant has to prove that this is not the case. In UK law the rule is 'he who asserts must prove'. If the writing company provide a plagiarism scanner report showing plagiarism (and we all know how such scanning systems have been abused in the past) how is the writer going to be able to disprove the results of the scan. Also, if the writing company say that the customer has complained, AND they produce a letter suppposedly from the customer, HOW can the writer prove this is not from the customer when they are not privy to the customers details (only the writing company has this information).

Anyone is entitled to bring a claim I was merely pointing out the pitfalls and explaining why many may be reluctant. Those who are still studying might be concerned that their university would find out about their writing work if they pursue a claim.

see the following article showing how a student running such a company has been expelled

prestoncitizen.co.uk/news/1883971.uclan_student_faces_expulsion_ following_essay_scam/?act=login

Please tell me, you legal minds! If a writer sells an unpaid essay to someone else, because he was denied of his earnings by the company for which he wrote it, is it an infringement of copyrights of that particular evil company who ordered the essay, but not paid for it?

There is nothing wrong with simply informing link-providers of the sites' illegal activities. It is the link providers' decision whether or not to act accordingly. It's not like the owners of the fraudulent essay sites INFORM the link providers about their illegal activities. The link providers have the right to know, if for no other reason than to protect their OWN reputations.

The essay remains yours until you are paid for it. If you receive no remuneration you are free to do with it what ever you want.

I fact you can write an essay and retain the copyright, especially since the essays are supposed to be for guidance only.

Thanks. Tomorrow I will post more about this scam. I have to get the details.

Illegality is determined by a final judgment issued by the court after hearing.I am sure the aggrieved writers only have their ownexperiences to relate and not the sites' illegal activities. Perhaps, you are more in a position to relate to the backlink providers about these illegal activities.

Encouraging the aggrieved writers to relate the sites' illegal activities not within their own personal knowledge would imperil them. However, I am confident that since you were the one who initiated this, you would be magnanimous and charitable enough to extend support in their legal strife.

Your post: "Without backlinks, their sites will fall lower in Google and other search engines, which means less business and fewer orders."

Reputation? Is this what this whole thing is about? Preservation of reputation and destruction of reputation? I must be in the wrong place. I thought people are here to relate their experiences, to inform, to warn and to discuss constructively the recommended courses of action that the aggrieved parties can obtain and opt for so that they can get JUSTICE--so that a repetition of unjust acts can be eradicated or discouraged.

I do not subscribe to TOPPLING DOWN businesses whether legitimately or illegitmately created; whether operating and managing under legitimate or unlawful business practices using UNORTHODOX ways (my opinion). I do not have any proprietary interests in any of them.


Nothing wrong--but must be couched on proper terms and done in good faith. Otherwise, there may be negative results. I recall a case where there was a stoppage of a site that sought to inform. Well, both parties were not able to enforce their default judgments considering that there was no treaty between the countries of which they are nationals.

But again, your recommended action on backlinks relate to essaywriters.net and its affiliates and NOT about the issue being discussed here involving a UK site.


Please, save it. But thanks anyway. I do not prefer being a recipient of other people's 'charities.'


A little prudence, won't hurt. I am sure you know that cases can be thrown out based on small jurisdictional issues.


Thank you for your suggestion but you see, it is my prerogative not to do so since the discussion was not limited to the request for information on exemptions.


You lengthily discussed and critiqued the proposed procedure which is intended for this specific UK site and NOT intended for MOST companies. I am sure you know that a case is analysed and studied based on its details, its evidence and its specific facts so that a procedure and a legal strategy can be adopted to "tailor-fit" for the case. The earlier posts included a link on the TOW (evidence) of this specific UK site. Therefore, the proposed procedure was adopted BASED ON and drafted in the LIGHT OF the facts and evidence preliminarily obtaining in the case. (PRELIMINARILY--because statements of the aggrieved writers and their respective evidence ARE YET TO BE SUBMITTED,that is why the procedure is referred to as PROPOSED). However, your discussion and critique was couched on general terms using MOST companies EXCEPT THE SPECIFIC UK site which is the object of the proposed procedure. I did not refer to Academic Knowledge--the first time I heard of it--my interest is centered on the issue being discussed. Moreover, your assertion that most of these writers are employed on a freelance basis negates your earlier assertion


that these writers are self employed because the industry is based on self employment. Self employment is different from employed on a freelance basis.

Please refer to the legal definitions of the terms.
"Worker
This is a broader category than 'employees' but normally excludes those who are self-employed. A worker is any individual who works for an employer, whether under a contract of employment, or any other contract where an individual undertakes to do or perform personally any work or services. Workers are entitled to core employment rights and protections. The following groups of people are likely to be workers but not employees: most agency workers

short term casual workers
some freelancers
Self-employed
If you're self-employed, you do not have a contract of employment with an employer. You're more likely to be contracted to provide services over a certain period of time for a fee and be in business in your own right."


I did already yesterday.


I am sure you feel that way. I respect your feelings. I and perhaps MAK, would agree that I or MAK and I am/are not here to engage in "grandstanding" (I am not saying that you are) nor engage in a contest that seeks to measure knowledge. I am also not here to correct other members' grammar because I know that I am not perfect myself. I do not engage in critiquing other's proposition unless I can advance and suggest another (not necessarily a better) recommendation but definitely not just whimpering in one corner. It is part of good taste (my opinion).

"Humility is the sure evidence of Christian virtues. Without it, we retain all our faults still, and they are only covered over with pride, which hides them from other men's observation, and sometimes from our own too-- François, Duc De La Rochefoucauld."


Please let me repeat myself: The proposed procedure is directed/intended for aggrieved writers of the specific UK site. It was never intendedfor those who avail the services of the essay writing website/customers.

I am very much aware of the reluctance of students and those who avail the services of these websites. In fact, my earlier posts addressed this matter specifically: My Post of 04 January 2009, 1:33 am:

"a) The consumer--very few if none at all, would want to bring a complaint even if they have been short changed because of the "weakness" of their position/situation. They cannot allege that they got an "F" because they presented in the university a written work of another and passed the same as theirs. They would immediately be expelled.The most that they can do is not avail of the pertinent website and post his/their experience on the web in forums, etc. which completely assures him/their anonymity of identity."

This I believe in: I do not want to engage in comments and discussions regarding anyone's proposition on how to deal with the aggrieved writers plight especially if it comes from one who is only motivated in good faith, to help and assist others UNLESS, I also can come up with an equally constructive and plausible suggestion. I respect people's efforts in advancing their proposals.

I am a "builder' not a "destroyer." And I do "walk my talk."
So, if you would excuse me now--I need to continue "the walk" and less of "the talk" and then I will watch.

Goodluck and more power to this site for unparalleled assistance to others! I think it is the only remaining site dealing with essay writing practices.

I have been here for years. My goals have not changed. I am here to prevent ripoff sites from defrauding customers. Everything I post is to affect that end.


I know exactly to which case you refer. You are incorrect about both the "stoppage" against the defendant's site (the site "stopped" due to a voluntary sale), as well as the "non-enforcement" of the judgment in the defendant's favor. Check out the latest docket in Justia.

All of us are well aware of your goal, your only goal is to let everyone know that you are retarded. Most people on this forum would certainly agree with me.

voir-dire - since you seem intent on TRYING to assist others bringing legal action against Peter Richardson- could you please disclose your EXACT legal qualifications, given the mumbo jumbo you keep coming out with.

You claim to have spoken to the tax office yet spout that NOT ALL EARNINGS have to be declared. Is this how you conduct your own business? If so do you KNow the penalty for failing to disclose ALL income.

My post on here was a generalised post on legal action available to freelance writers based on misconceptions being given in posts by other posters such as yourself.

I for one would not discourage legal action as this is what pays my bills (tongue-in-cheek), however, I was warning of the dangers of taking such action, especially since most of those who have been scammed can ill afford to waste more money trying to pursue their lost earnings.


It takes a big man to admit their mistake- which I was more than happy to do, however you have not acknowledged your OWN mistake that claims can be for UP to £100,000. I can assure IF i was been asked specifically for legal advice I would have ensured that I did not make a transpositional error of putting the price for personal injury claims instead of money claims. The fact remains that SMALL claims courts will only hear cases up to £5000 not £100,000 as you claim.

If you are talking about bringing a joint action against PR I hope that you know sufficent information about Part 20 claims as joinder actions are a minefield of anomalies.


I think yu mean JURISPRUDENTIAL issues. Jurisdiction refers to the locality in which the case can be heard.

That is just SO sad. >.<

For you and your crooked employer? Yes. For American consumers? No.

@exwriter

Suit yourself. The "spotlight" is on you. I do not really care much.


The amount of claim contained in the complaint determines if it should be filed before the HMCS. Jurisdiction defines the limits or territory within which authority may be exercised.

Thus,
When HCMS specified: "claim may be started using Money Claim Online if it meets all the following conditions: a) less than £100,000 (excluding any interest or costs claimed); x x x" It refers to the limits of its authority. A complaint containing a money claim let us say for, £1M would not fall within its authority. It is a matter of jurisdiction. Jurisprudence is another thing.

BUT, then again--go ahead, suit yourself. You are entitled to what you believe in.


Are you not bent on helping others? when you youself had been victimised as you have claimed?
Can you not even lift a finger to advance some constructive way/plan of addressing the alleged unjust practices?
Will you just repeat to every victimised writer here who complains, "charge it to experience and bear the loss, find a better company"? Has it not even crossed your mind that these writers with sufficient intelligence may have already have thought of what you have been repeatedly saying and yet would still like to pursue and take action?

So let us just allow the alleged unjust business practices to flourish and for the victimised writers to bear their loss. After all their experiences can highlight the 'legitimate' companies.

Of your 110 posts, you never even ventured on trying to think of a legal way to assist these people being a brilliant, well-respected and much revered barrister that you are?

I only have to stay a few days consistently to get the entire picture of everything here. I surely enjoy watching. People come and go with complaints and stories of fraud and injustice but not a SINGLE SOUL was ever assisted or given any sufficient direction towards collecting a SINGLE DIME (not referring to the site).


And (among other means) making use of the aggrieved writers' actual experiences to accomplish such an end. Thanks for the clarification.

@exwriter do not bother me with your posts. I do not intend to dignify them with replies.

Customers who DON'T get ripped off provide REPEAT business and don't develop a jaded opinion about the entire industry, which, of course, benefits writers. My eyes are wide open.

I can see that very well. Good luck!

Now, back to a part of my real work and watch "how the wheels of justice grind."
I surely enjoyed all of this.

I missed something!


YES of course! And this "legal action" that you want to be rammed down in people's throats is-----


otherwise stated, People-- writers get kicked around, feel the pain, bear the loss and whimper like a dog in one corner! That is very helpful!


Were you not taught in law school never to apply generalisations unless you have the actual evidence and recital of facts?

It is very clear that you sought to discourage victims to take action--you sought to preempt and block a proposed procedure that sought to secure justice for the victimised writers by making your general assumptions and applying them on YOUR OWN speculations and conjectures.





Give it up.


Sorry but the only thing "big" that I see is your HEAD.


Very frustrating! Why do I keep looking for legs from snakes!

@exwriter do not bother me with your posts. I do not intend to dignify them with replies--a task that I find very frustrating.

You have taken the quote completely out of context as well you know. I asked for your LEGAL experience given that you are purporting to offer assistance to others. I did NOT make any comment as to whether I was interested in helping others or not and therefore to ASSUME that I do NOT want to help anyone is completely wrong AND offensive to such such a thing.


They couldn't afford my fees and I am not in the habit of working for nothing!!

Having spent £35000 on my career do you seriously expect me to OFFER my services for nothing- get real!!


So I take that to mean you have NO legal qualification !!!Well here's to applicants throwing good money after bad. Ever heard of the saying

'A little knowledge is a dangerous thing!'


I am basing my answer ON ACTUAL EXPERIENCE IN COURT something you SEEM to know very little about. I DO NOT want to see writers who have already LOST a considerable amount of money LOSE even further money on a ACTION doomed to failure.

HOW do you propose to FUND this action your purporting to bring. IF you took the time to read the leaflet on EXEMPTIONS you would note that to receive an EXEMPTION you MUST be in receipt of ONE of the listed benefits. YOU would also know that for an EXEMPTION to be given EACH applicant has to qualify for the exemption- you CANNOT bring a CLASS action based on ONE persons exemptions.

You also did not respond to your knowledge (or lack of) of joinder actions which I guess is non-existent.


It takes a very small minded person to resort to personal insults when they are losing!!!

STOP misinforming these already cheated writers and I will stop bombarded you with questions!!!!

Of course you DID help! A lot if I may say. . .

exwriter:
the bet form of action would be to discontinue working for the company once there has been a problem receiving payment and put your losses down to experience, or don't start working for these companies in the first place. Learn from the experience of others and try to find companies that will pay for your time and efforts.


I am sure you do know how to read theDisclaimer:
3. All posts are anonymous unless the poster decides to reveal his or her personal details.

It is my prerogative whether to divulge my personal details. Of course, I am quite sure that you will again THROW YOUR WEIGHT AROUND like an insecure threatened brat.


I do not have the penchant to ASS-UME like you do--because it is all plastered here at the site.


And you discourage the victims because there were two people who wanted to help them for free. Such MAGNANIMITY!


Thanks for your candidness.
I do not live my life miserably--that is REAL.


Misplaced conclusion. Read the premise, I am sure you have diligently studied logic.And who said we were collecting money.

My POST: 03 Jan. 2009, 8:24 pm.

"b) MAK and I, and the others are NOT COLLECTING ANY FEES FOR ANY HELP THAT WE EXTEND TO EVERYONE"

How many times do I have to post 'history'? The problem with you is you keep on grandstanding without even trying to apprise yourself of the ACTUAL FACTS. And when it is pointed out to you--you throw your tantrums. Do you 'fight' in court even without knowing the background of the case?


Talking about yourself. People will just have to read the posts. If you were (that is an IF) my lawyer, I would want to go straight to the guillotine to spare myself of all the agony of your mistakes and haughtiness.


Sure, your actual experience in court and WITHOUT ACTUAL RECITAL OF FACTS AND ACTUAL EVIDENCE.
I agree, I have little knowledge perhaps even a lack of knowledge IN APPEARING BEFORE THE COURT WITHOUT EVIDENCE AND ACTUAL RECITAL OF FACTS OF A CLIENT AND PROSECUTING/DEFENDING BASED ON "I suspect that, I doubt, I suspect, potential legal action!"

I give that to you--You are an EXPERT on that.


It is none of your business. What is it to you anyway. Your concern? Mind your own business.


Lecture time Folks! I am sure you wanted to be a teacher when you were little. Folks, see how bossy and how haughty brilliance can ever be!


And what? Give you another ocassion for grandstanding again. Content yourself with one stage.


If you were the judge, you would have to inhibit yourself for pre-judging the case. See how biased you are? There is no evidence yet, no recital of facts by each complainant/claimant--the procedure is a proposal--and here you are throwing your useless weight around--prejudging doomsday when no one has even started at all!

You are just ENVIOUSbecause people can have the luxury of extending free services to help others!
Who are you protecting?


Let me refresh your memory:


This is basic in law school! I think you are the one confused.


I am not competing. See how threatened you are? Life for you is always a competition--always wanting to outprove everyone.Perhaps, it is time to grow up!


We were discussing until you appeared and decided to grandstand. We were still planning, thinking aloud--no evidence, no facts yet, no complainants yet!READ! "I would suggest that those who would prefer taking this legal recourse to apprise themselves of the guidelines of the website and the procedure. . .Should there be further inquiries and issues, MAK and I are here to help out."

Then you came . . with your 'you will never make it' attitude[/b[b]]! Such audacity, when you cannot even get the preliminary facts appearing in the previous posts STRAIGHT.

You posted the TOW of Academic Knowledge when the TOW of Project1stClasshad been posted previously; the application of the procedure to the customers when the proposed procedure was intended for the writersand was stated very clearly; your confusion between self-employed and freelancerswhen I have pasted the information from a Government source, etc.

You DID NOT EVEN BOTHER TO READ AND APPRISE YOURSELF of the background but easily and conveniently--you CONCLUDED EVERYTHING WITH your 'you-will-never make-it-attitude.'

Misinforming?
READ! "I would suggest that those who would prefer taking this legal recourse to apprise themselves of the guidelines of the website and the procedure. . .Should there be further inquiries and issues, MAK and I are here to help out."

What the hell do you think these writers are?! Stupid people who do not know how to understand, read and comprehend?!

If there is anyone who is MISINFORMED IT IS YOU! You failed to INFORM YOURSELF OF THE BACKGROUND, THE PRELIMINARY FACTS AND THE STAGE OF DISCUSSION!and, PREMATURELY YOU PREEMPTED EVERYTHING!


and you are a barrister? Further, I shall sayeth naught!

Signs of Insecurity
Defensiveness
An insecure person cannot handle criticism. They're not open to hearing about ways they might improve. If they disagree with the criticism, they try to argue because they're not happy with who they are.

Read all the posts platered here.

Can't Enjoy Silence
They fill every void with meaningless chatter, almost to avoid having to reflect on themselves. The unfortunate consequence is the annoyance of everyone around them, who secretly look for an escape.

do not bother me with your posts. I do not intend to dignify them with replies--a task that I find very frustrating.

Self-Promoting
Insecure people tend to talk about themselves constantly, as if they feel like they have to prove themselves. Self-promotion is paramount to over-compensation for doubt.


Bullying
Insecure people feel threatened by others, and one way to cope with this is to try and squash them. The most threatening person of all to an insecure person is a secure person, because they can sense their power.


Overly Authoritative
Insecure people tend to compensate for their lack of confidence by taking out their frustrations on others.


Overly Competitive


Materialistic
An insecure person does need to show off.


EX-cessive use of !!!! --calm down and balance your emotions. Your emotional immaturity can be easily detected.

NOW, Go to HELL and ROT!

I am proud to announce that voir_dire has won the coveted "World's Longest Post" award!

Funny. I hope you can keep that sense of humor for a long time. Some people find it endearing :)

Again with the insults- obviously not working in a legal sphere- none of the colleagues I gave in the industry would treat other colleagues in such a derogatory manner.


such appalling spelling!


Then HOW will you pay for ANY legal action. YOU cannot get this for free IF you are representing others. ARE you funding this yourself?


Guillotine? wasn't that abolished years ago? they don't execute people in civil courts anyway!


Merely pointing out a fact that you will NOT be exempt from charges in the court BECAUSE you have to meet the criteria

CITE me one case were a freelance writer has won a case against an essay writing company- you cant! why? because there has never been onw! Why? because MOST know that it would be a waste of money as THEY CANNOT PROVE that the work was not complained about by the customer because they have no knowledge of that customer.


I am not the one dodging issues here. Stop making this about attacking someone just because they are WARNING a potential LITIGANT that they COULD lose money IF they bring an action in court.


Defensiveness huh! like how you avoid a straight forward question- are you legally trained? yes or no? simple question one word answer surely you can manage that!

You are getting annoyed ONLY because I dared to challenge your lack of knowledge on the english legal system. yes some people CAN be regarded as agency workers- however, you INCORRECTLY stated that the writing company do not have to pay national insurance for agency workers check out the link below for the requirements for someone to be classified as an agency working- please note the point that states.

your employer deducts tax and National Insurance from your wages- this makes you an EMPLOYEE. where the person making the payment does not deduct national insurance this can make them a worker, which according to the site

a worker (which means you do not do so well)

worksmart.org.uk/rights/i_work_through_an_agency_am_i

Some of our most important employment rights are unfortunately only available to those who are classed as 'employees'. These are set out below. Many agency workers do not qualify for these rights as they do not pass the 'employee' test.

The right to claim unfair dismissal where you are sacked without notice or good cause.
The right to redundancy pay
The right to take maternity, paternity and parental leave and to request flexible working
The right to paid time off for antenatal care.
Right to a written statement of main terms and conditions of employment

Taken from the site listed above.

and further on agency workers below

personneltoday.com/articles/2008/03/04/44659/agency-workers.html

They DO NOT enjoy the same rights as employees and their contracts can be discontinued at will.


I'm glad you finally recognise yourself in your own quote!

NOW, Go to HELL and ROT! - how rude. Is that how you always respond when you cannot argue with the truth?

You try to make out that I do NOT care about the fact that writers have been SCAMMED. IF I did NOT care I would not be advising them to THINK carefully before becoming embroiled in legal action. HECK I could make a fortune telling them I could represent them in court- however, the role of a barrister is to assess the strenghts and weaknesses of a case- as I am sure Mak will tell you- and then give an opinion on the likelihood of the success of that case.

In UK law those seeking legal action will first approach a lawyer/ solicitor such as Mak, who will then glean the opinion of a barrister, so as to not waste the clients money in litigation destined to fail.

I could have been getting paid £150 an hour for the advice I have given here. IF anyone wants to pursue a claim the please proceed, however, on a professional level the chances of success are so remote that IF I was being asked for my professional opinion I would say that the chances of losing are significantly higher than the chances of winning due to the difficulty in providing substantive evidence against the assertions made by the writing companies.

magnanimity

Check the dictionary--it's the CORRECT SPELLING. Perhaps, YOU ARE NOT USED TO SEEING AND READING THE WORD.


A total LIE or HYPOCRISY? Everyone can see how you are.


What is it to you?! Be content with what you are paid for discouraging the writers to vindicate their rights!


You are pathetic!It was used to signify painful death which is better than to experience the AGONY of your mistakes and haughtiness!
Now, is there still a need to spell it out for you?


Sure you are warning POTENTIAL LITIGANTS because there is a need to protect not the potential litigant.

WHO are you protecting?


You really are DISPLAYING YOUR IGNORANCE. Defensiveness? When I clearly said I will NOT DIVULGE MY PERSONAL DETAILS. That is not defensiveness!
I am not defending anything--I AM MERELY EXERCISING MY PREROGATIVE!
You really are one INSECURE THREATENED BRAT.

If they disagree with the criticism, they try to argue because they're not happy with who they are.
They fill every void with meaningless chatter, almost to avoid having to reflect on themselves.


Come up with something ORIGINAL!


Assess what!? when there is no case, no evidence yet, no complainant yet, no recital of facts yet--PREMATURE PREEMPTION! WHO are you protecting?!

And give an opinion on the likelihood of the success of that case?

and you are a barrister?


I am sure you will be paid by those you protect.


Calm down because your arguments are all scattered.
An assertion is a mere declaration. Substantial evidence is more than a mere scintilla of evidence. So, if we have less of a mere scintilla of evidence it will not prevail over a MERE ASSERTION which the courts usually consider self-serving.

COME ON! Clearly another case of your-----

"


You are just destroying yourself here. Better go back to work, you need to pay your bills.
I am no longer going to reply to your posts because I feel sorry for you right now. I would only be destroying you further.


Because of people like you, PREMATURELY PREEMPTING WITH A YOU-WILL-NEVER-MAKE-IT ATTITUDE . . . . . . . . WHY? everyone has an idea now.

You are just destroying yourself here. Better go back to work, you need to pay your bills.
I am no longer going to reply to your posts because I feel sorry for you right now. I would only be destroying you further.

Sigh.. can't even engage my argument, or were you unable to read between the lines? >.<

You said:


To which I replied:


The underlying argument being that if you've been doing this for years, why is it that it doesn't seem like you've accomplished ANYTHING AT ALL? :p I mean c'mon, there were over 500 orders at essaywriters.net during the last peak season! :D Are you saying that that's what your years of work have amounted to? And don't give me that "oh, the best is yet to come" crap because you've been yapping about that since I joined this forum last year.

You're a joke.

Voir- I refuse to resort to your level. I have stated the facts ACCORDING to English law.

I have irrefutable proven that YOU would not be exempt from charges, and that any potential LITIGANT wold only have such an exemption IF they met the criteria. IF not it is going to cost someone to bring this action.

I DO NOT WORK for any company as your comments IMPLY suggesting that I am PROTECTING someone. If you has an ounce of intelligence and READ the post correctly you would see THAT MY AIM IS TO PROTECT THE POOR AGGRIEVED WRITER FROM WASTING MONEY bringing an action which is ALMOST certainly doomed to failure.

I will let the writers be the judge as to whether they BELIEVE that I am doing this for any other reason but to protect them. I am sure WB has sufficient intelligence to appreciate what I have been saying here since she also agrees that there is very little recourse through the courts as the rights of AGENCY workers are not protected as you claim.

I notice that you DID NOT address all the points I made including the link pointing out the status of agency workers ar WORKERS and not EMPLOYEES. Something which makes a WORLD of difference when pursuing a legal claim.

You are just destroying yourself here. Better go back to work, you need to pay your bills.
I am no longer going to reply to your posts because I feel sorry for you right now. I would only be destroying you further.

How dare you suggest I AM NOT PAYING MY BILLS. Fortunately for you defamation through a forum is not actionable otherwise you would have been feeling my wrath. I am however going to ask the Mod to monitor your posts as you are becoming most objectionable and also giving false hope to writers based on NO LEGAL KNOWLEDGE AT ALL.

As far as I am concerned I will not indulge you further. If Mak would like my opinion or indeed the opinion of a colleague of mine within chambers to consider the strength/weakness of the propose case once he has finished gathering the evidence I will gladly supply both.

Mak if you would like this please reply using the forum and I will private message you with the address to send the documentation.

LMAO! You think that's a lot? LMAO!

You don't even know how utterly pathetic you are. I know for a FACT that one of the legitimate companies averages well over 2,000 orders PER MONTH.

You lose--again.

voir_dire and exwriter:

I think that your time could be better spent going after the crooks instead of sparring with each other. EW_writer is laughing at you guys while he and EssayWriters.net continue to defraud both writers and customers on a daily basis.

Sigh... another pathetic trick to pull. :p If essaywriters.net was handling 500 orders daily and those orders were cycling with new ones throughout the peak season, then it could have easily handled over 2000 orders over the course of 30 days.

I'm telling you, it's just too easy to make you look silly. :D


No, I'm not. I'm laughing at WB and her crappy-ass way of trying to make people think that she's actually doing anybody any good here. :) I'm also not defrauding any customers since my clients always get excellent work from me. That's probably the reason why I'm still on the payroll. Oh and btw, I rarely get projects that pay less than $10/page and only do so when the project's really easy.

Nice try. The same could be said about the legitimate company. You're a complete idiot.


If you truly thought that way, you wouldn't bother to attack me CONSTANTLY. Regardless, it is irrefutable that my work has helped countless people. That fact is clear simply through the dozens of people who have communicated appreciation in these threads and via private messages!

Your act is tired. Nobody believes a word you type. You have never pposted a shred of evidence to support ANY of your baseless accusations--EVER! You're an admitted deviant and fraud. You have openly admitted that you intentionally lie to customers about your location, nationality, and qualifications. You have also openly acknowledged that your employer engages in egregious fraud (which I have proven with devastating evidence), but do you stop working for essaywriters.net from Ukraine? No. Why? Because you are an immoral, dishonest, deceptive, cold-hearted, worthless crook. End of story.

What? That's exactly my point. You said your "legit companies" have 2000 projects a month. I'm just saying that essaywriters.net probably had the same volume of orders or more during the last peak season. Who's the idiot again? >.<


Oh c'mon, loser. I attack you coz it's fun to kick as*****s like you around. :p You really should know that by now. :D

added: And oh, it's not so constant. I only indulge in whipping your arse when I have free time.


Hahahahahaha!!!! When people go against you, you scrutinize them for having very few posts on this board and claim that they're just troll accounts, but when they praise you for a job well done, you accept it wholeheartedly regardless of their post counts and their characters and treat it as though it was the real thang. :P How many of your "countless" supporters are plagiarists who got booted out of essaywriters.net because of being crappy writers? How many are supporters of the websites you claim as legit? And finally, how many of them are really customers and not posers themselves? :p Sigh... irrefutable my a**.


Errr... let's see. essaywriters.net is a shady company that boots out writers and only partially refunds clients for bad work. They play both ends and care only about themselves. The small number of writers that they do keep are kept only because they provide exceptional work and bring in much of the site's income. They pay pathetic wages during the slow seasons but give good enough rates ($10++/page) during peak seasons. Do I need proof for those? :p

Once again, not a SHRED of proof of ANY kind. I rest my case. Nothing to see here, folks.

We were discussing and you threw your worthless weight around, over proving, over compensating, insulting, arrogantly GRANDSTANDING and attacking me!
I EXCUSED MYSELF SEVERAL TIMES but you persisted in your INSULTS AND ATTACKS.
I only returned the FAVOR!Trying to be 'meek and humble' now WILL NOT DETRACT FROM YOUR ARROGANCE AND YOUR PERSONAL INSULTS EARLIER.


Denial is the weakest defence.



Yes, you are a writer.


PREMATURELY PROTECTING--when there is no evidence yet, no complainants yet, no recital of facts yet--BY GRANDSTANDING, ATTACKING AND INSULTING ME! Prejudging doomsday when [b]no one has even started at all![/b]You DID NOT EVEN BOTHER TO READ AND APPRISE YOURSELF of the background but easily and conveniently--you CONCLUDED EVERYTHING WITH your 'you-will-never make-it-attitude.'

You failed to INFORM YOURSELF OF THE BACKGROUND, THE PRELIMINARY FACTS AND THE STAGE OF DISCUSSION!and, PREMATURELY YOU PREEMPTED EVERYTHING!



Stop benchmarking.


Do you still NOT GET "THE DRIFT" shall I spell it out for you?I DO NOT WANT TO HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH YOU--I FIND YOU DISGUSTING, ARROGANT, HAUGHTY, INSECURE PIECE OF EXISTENCE!


MY POST:


NOT PAYING ~ NEED TO PAY

a matter of comprehension. . .


You do not scare me at all.


From arrogance and haughtiness, now threats and bullying tactics. You can ask anyone you please--the hell I care.


Coming from someone with comprehension problems of basic terms. You see, your overuseof that manifests your insecurity.


THEREyou go . . .that is what you have wanted all along. You should not have wasted my time.


My time is well spent doing that among other things, WB. All of you have limited knowledge of what really is 'out' there.

I am sure that--that PIECE OF EXISTENCE WHO I FIND DISGUSTINGLY DREADFULwill twist this post and infuse malice like the way he did in this post:

"I kind of got the impression from the posts of Voir that he/she is hoping to cash on the hard work you have put into exposing the fraudulent sites, and then tries to establish him/herself as a kind of redeeming angel"

This is BUT A SHALLOW, SUPERFICIAL and MALICIOUS PERVERSION OF TRUTH. I do not hope or intend to cash on the hard work of anyone because (and I am saying this with all humility) the hard work, the expense, and the risks that I have taken may be more than what anyone here (forum) has taken considering that my objectives are far broader than those stated in this site.

I will personally deal with himafter I finish what I need to do. I will make him EAT, MINCE, CHEW and CHOKE ON EVERY INSULTING AND MALICIOUS WORD HE SAID.

Says he who accuses me of working for a company rather than trying to save writers from losing more money.

Now you are showing your true colours. I hope the Mod reads as they are bound to see who is supposedly insulting who!


If you read the thread properly YOU were the one starting with the personal attacks. However, once again I find myself agreeing with WB and refuse to continue debating this matter with you. Let the writers decide based on the information supplied. At least if they do decide to fork out money for legal action AND lose they cannot say they were not warned.

You have no idea about the extent of my legal resources and knowledge so, once again, please stop misrepresenting your conjecture as fact.

Oh please, do not take it as something personal or as a challenge to youor to the others who seek to expose the fraud and the scam here at the forum. It was not meant that way therefore there is no need to defend your turf as I have no intentionof being a part of it.

IT was meant to allude to the factual and evidentiary considerations that may define the entire extent of the criminalitywhich may be in the possession of international OR national law enforcement agencies like the INTERPOL.


Whatever malicious allusions and imputations that--the member I referred to earlier may have brought to sway, mold and shape your thinking and perhaps of a few others here about me, is evidently the very essence of what I abhor and loathe about what he (that member) sought to accomplish. This will be dealt with in due time.

Now, let me leave you in your turf. No one is challenging your unparalleled contributions and efforts but please be mindful of the fact that there are others, officially or otherwise who also in their own small way, contribute resources and information. No single person or organisation has the monopoly of knowledge or resources.


Now, you know how it feels
to be accused of that BECAUSE you accused FIRST.


I was merely describing a NATURAL REACTION that anyone who FINDS himself in my position would feel.

]


/forum/ot/site-fraudulent-others-825/ - selective memory
Inconsistent.

Proof? Proof of what? O.o Didn't I just say that:


What exactly should I provide proof for? :D

Dear Ew writer please don't be troubled by the queries posted by retarded people.

When WB was born, the first thing she did was to ask the Nurse, the proof of her being a Nurse and guess what people she was beaten up brutally, then came the Doctor to examine her condition, the loud mouth as always asked the Doctor the proof of him being the Doctor, she was thrown away from the Hospital and then the biggest blow came when she asked her parents the proof that she was their daughter, poor parents soon ran out of options and threw her into an asylum, she has been asking people of proofs from the asylum and guess what people there are fed up of her and soon going to stab her......

Ahhhhhhhhh, trymeretardeddave is trying to make another buddy in his desperate fight against me. How cute.

I am weak like you who has got no support system, shove you **** up your ass because thats the only place it can go

Yes, you are.

Please work on your English. It's truly painful--for everyone--trying to decipher your posts.

Unlike his picture lol

You almost feel sorry for him- I did say ALMOST. Surely he didn't put that picture on his web page of his own free will- someone must have forced him to do it- why else would you include such a hideous picture of yourself for all to see.