Blackmailed by a company I hired. What would you do here?

pawntoc5

All good ideas. I'll take up on these leads, thank you. I do think there's harassment involved here though - there's clear intent to cause distress and harassing someone in this way cannot be acceptable.

Aylesbury_Duck

It's not harassment, you're in a dispute and still engaging with him. Pursue one of the other routes suggested.

pawntoc5

Does corresponding with him disqualify the harassment claim? Surely any person being harassed would try to reach out and say "please stop" in hopes of resolving the issue before seeking help from the authorities? It's a bit strange to me that attempt to resolve it means it's no considered harassment? The Protection from Harassment Act 1997 seemed to have a focus on "intent to cause distress", which is the case here. Can anyone clarify if what other posters are saying is true?

Aylesbury_Duck

pawntoc5 wrote: »

Does corresponding with him disqualify the harassment claim? Surely any person being harassed would try to reach out and say "please stop" in hopes of resolving the issue before seeking help from the authorities? It's a bit strange to me that attempt to resolve it means it's no considered harassment? The Protection from Harassment Act 1997 seemed to have a focus on "intent to cause distress", which is the case here. Can anyone clarify if what other posters are saying is true?

You can pursue the harassment angle if you wish - you seem to be clued up on it. What I meant was that in my opinion, it isn't harassment and you are more likely to get the result you want through the other avenues. I may be wrong. If you want definitive advice, consult a solicitor.

unholyangel

pawntoc5 wrote: »

Does corresponding with him disqualify the harassment claim? Surely any person being harassed would try to reach out and say "please stop" in hopes of resolving the issue before seeking help from the authorities? It's a bit strange to me that attempt to resolve it means it's no considered harassment? The Protection from Harassment Act 1997 seemed to have a focus on "intent to cause distress", which is the case here. Can anyone clarify if what other posters are saying is true?

You need to clearly tell them to stop communicating with you and you need to stop communicating with them - typically when someone addresses you, you'd expect a response from them. If they have a valid reason for continuing to do so (such as attempting to recover monies due under an agreed contract), its unlikely to be seen as harassment (otherwise everyone could avoid potential creditors by telling them not to contact them & claiming harassment).

At most, the police will have a word and tell them to take you to court. Which is why I recommend TS & ICO - TS are unlikely to take legal action over an individual complaint but they too will often contact traders for a quiet word if the trader is doing something they shouldn't be doing (which he is - aggressive trading practices are banned). And the ICO has fined for single breaches before.

hollydays

pawntoc5 wrote: »

Does corresponding with him disqualify the harassment claim? Surely any person being harassed would try to reach out and say "please stop" in hopes of resolving the issue before seeking help from the authorities? It's a bit strange to me that attempt to resolve it means it's no considered harassment? The Protection from Harassment Act 1997 seemed to have a focus on "intent to cause distress", which is the case here. Can anyone clarify if what other posters are saying is true?

Simply saying to someone. Stop contacting me , is sufficient, but to then go into more detail makes you look as bad as them.
The rule with this kind of stuff is not to engage other than the briefest statement about ceasing contact .

pawntoc5

Ohhh, I think there’s some misunderstanding here. I'm not claiming he's harassing me because he’s emailing me. He's harassing me because he posted a public Google review under my employer's listing that targeted me. It's the first thing you see when you search for my employer's name, on the right hand side at the very top of the Google page, so highly visible. The review is directly targeted at me (he put my full name and capitalised it just to draw attention to it) and says a number of false things about me. He even says my employer should “drop” me in the review. That sort of thing is done to cause distress to the target, and that review is the harassment I’m referring to.

Regardless of how he feels about my review on his services, his review on my employer's listing is unwarranted because he never even interacted with them or used their services and he’s merely using the Google listing as a way to target me, an individual.

Anyway, I think we’re largely sorted for now.

Les79

I'd suggest:

- Speaking to your employer and giving them a heads-up (it could escalate to calls to your bosses etc)

- Reporting to the police

- Speaking to a solicitor if you wish to consider making a civil claim.


With the claim possibility, you could approach it from the harrassment (including what I presume to be libel in their "review" of you) point of view AND the GDPR point of view.

There's an argument to be made that you only provided him with data for the purposes of contracting for services, but if you never gave your employer's details to him then he has unlawfully processed your personal information to obtain your employer's info.

There could be big money involved to be fair, however getting him to pay is a different issue (and I note that you don't really wish to pursue the legal routes based on your very first post here).

unholyangel

pawntoc5 wrote: »

Ohhh, I think there’s some misunderstanding here. I'm not claiming he's harassing me because he’s emailing me. He's harassing me because he posted a public Google review under my employer's listing that targeted me. It's the first thing you see when you search for my employer's name, on the right hand side at the very top of the Google page, so highly visible. The review is directly targeted at me (he put my full name and capitalised it just to draw attention to it) and says a number of false things about me. He even says my employer should “drop” me in the review. That sort of thing is done to cause distress to the target, and that review is the harassment I’m referring to.

Regardless of how he feels about my review on his services, his review on my employer's listing is unwarranted because he never even interacted with them or used their services and he’s merely using the Google listing as a way to target me, an individual.

Anyway, I think we’re largely sorted for now.

Can't speak for others, but no misunderstanding on my part.

A one off event is not harassment. It needs to be repeated behaviour.

steampowered

unholyangel wrote: »

Can't speak for others, but no misunderstanding on my part.

A one off event is not harassment. It needs to be repeated behaviour.

In this case the trader has made multiple threats. He emailed the Op threatening to call his/her workplace; and posted a google review on her employer's google page.

That is two separate actions which would satisfy the test for a "course of conduct" under the Protection From Harassment Act 1997.

In the Op's situation I personally would not hesitate to issue a claim seeking damages under the Protection From Harassment Act 1997.

Op I also wonder if you could report the review to google and ask them to take it down?