Shady, dishonest and Immoral
Poor old DTI almost backed down over its own black list:An example from the news.
Dated: 13 May 2004
STRICTLY NOT FOR PUBLICATION
Your article published on www.unjustis.co.uk on 4 May 2004 entitled “The Dark List May 2004” and your revised article of the same title
We write further to your email to our (edited) dated 11 May 2004 and to the revised article written and published by you on www.unjustis.co.uk entitled “The Dark List May 2004”.
The revised article is unacceptable to (Law Firm). The assertions in the revised article are entirely false and you have continued to defame (Law Firm). In our letter dated 10 May 2004 we clearly requested that you remove the original article from the Internet, cease any publication of the article and publish an apology. You have failed to comply with our request.
In our above-mentioned letter we clearly stated that (Law Firm) do not have a franchise for publicly funded civil litigation work and therefore, if instructed, clients are required to pay privately. Further, we made clear that (Law Firm) do not advertise that we are able to offer publicly funded advice in relation to solely civil fraud. Our Corporate Crime and Risk Department are able to offer publicly funded advice in relation to criminal fraud matters.
By continuing to include (Law Firm) on a list called “The Dark List” you suggest that (Law Firm) is of a shady, dishonest or immoral nature.
We request that you immediately remove this firm’s name from your publication, known as ‘The Dark List’, and provide us with the undertakings requested in our previous letter, failing which we reserve the right to commence proceedings against you for damages and/or injunctive relief as a result of the above mentioned defamatory publication. Such proceedings will include a claim for payment of our legal costs. We expressly reserve any and all of our rights in this matter.
We suggest you seek independent legal advice.
Their name has been removed, to save their blushes. They're still on the list, though, but I do thank them for their contribution to the offending article's construction.
Much more soon.