Tel: 0800 999 3282
Data Recovery Companies HomeNews Data Recovery NewsletterSitemap
Print-friendly version

Have You Been Mulcted ?

Have You Been Mulcted ?
Have You Been Mulcted ?

 Since this article was first written Andy commenced his own legal action against those that attacked him read more : 
 fields scam victim gets justice through courts ? 

Q. Why would a a small businessman stand up to a corporations bullying ways and what is supposed to be a reputable company respected by the courts ?.
A. Sadly because Trading Standards, the ASA and the OFT and Ministry of Justice failed to intervene until hundreds of consumers had been scammed.

Well, you know when you've been Tangoed but how would you know if you'd ever been MULCTED?

Could this be a role reversal and the Honorary Orange man gets a legal slap in the face instead ? 

Want to know more about  Fields Group Quickie Divorce Action Direct or Fields Associates.

This article is about a corporation which attempted to bully a smaller competitor using a vexatious claim to cover up their defrauding of consumers.

Their threat to put me out of business was real but  instead Fields Associates (Rapid Data / Data Phoenix / Fields Data Recovery) were mulcted by the court and made to pay more than they had attempted to sue from the director of a rival group of data recovery companies which has helped many consumers to get their money back after being sold fake data recovery reports.


To be mulcted
It doesn't sound very pleasant and my guess would be that it isn't and it isn't meant to be. A legal slap in the face is far more embarassing especially  when you consider their Chairman claims to be "  a best selling author"   who "is regarded as the country’s leading authority on the forensic analysis of data recovered from all storage media."  and  " His advice is regularly sought by the Courts as an expert witness".

How many Professors secure Tenure at Buckingham University Astrobiology Department without publishing any research papers ?

Plainitiff v Defendant  - The Plaintiff claims £X,000's damages from the defendant .

 If a plaintiff wants to sue someone for £X'000's  then they can try to win by presenting their case or if they are arrogant enough to believe that they "own the law"  they can use their financial resources in an attempt to force a defendant to capitulate under the weight of costs and inconvenience of a vexatious claim.

Effectively winning the case by default - afterall how many individuals can afford a solicitor to defend against a £multimillion corporations "in house legal team" and hired legal counsel ?.

Its the classic bully boy tactic.. we are bigger, richer and more powerful than you and you will do as we say or we "will put you out of business and your home" by using financial power, government grants and misinformation to buy a result.

With a company  mantra  " Sector domination through unrelenting growth" and ISO-9001 they must be the experts they claim to be surely ?

To be " mulcted in costs" is used in  legal fields, and essentially means  to obtain money by means of imposing a fine or tax.

The plaintiff
  applies to a court for damages against their intended victim and assumes the defendant will capitulate rather than spend a fortune on solicitors costs..

Instead of admitting fault  a bully can use the monies it takes from its victims to effectively financially cripple anyone who complains about their practices, thats why they are so litigious and take out High Court Injunctions, by making their detractor the  "defendant" (victim) scares everyone from saying anything about their modus operandi..

Lets face it most of us would back down when faced with legal costs that exceed the likely renumeration....

In this case the defendant (victim) did stand up to the bully the Judge instead awards the defendant a financial settlement against the plaintiff,  this is a real slap in the face for the bully,  the award formula is extra-ordinary and can be represented by the equation     X+Y= M
    £X-000's the plaintiff claimed +£Y for inconvenience and costs incurred by the defendant equals M  mulcted in costs award to the defendant,. 
The plaintiff *  had brought a case to court vexatiously in an attempt to bully the alledged defendant,  a Judge after spending considerable deliberation and listening to all pleadings and cross examination  ruled that not only was the plaintiff wrong to bring the claim to court but also was attempting to buy a legal or punitive sanction by the back door.

The Judge is showing displeasure and possibly angered  when such a  case is brought before the court,  prepared by a £multimillion ministry of justice contractor who should know better, despite several warnings.

 The plaintiff  who claims to be in charge of a group experts in their Fields :  digital intelligence, data recovery, computer forensics, quickie divorces and will writing, as well as claiming to have expert computer forensics witnesses, will no doubt have felt the judges displeasure by being "mulcted in costs" and the Judge  reinforces the idea that vexatious or malicious procecution is not what courts are for.
Such rulings are extremely rare and when awarded effectively means the Judge not only throws the case out but is effectively say  "Do not try this again"

We all await the outcome of the High Court Injunction  -  of course the Fields Group claim to process  2500 Injunctions a year in the UK -   I wonder if they are all against their victims ?.  Action Direct UK Ltd another Fields Group operation Ministry of Justice Ruled against them

* Fields Associates (Plaintiff) v Fasthosts and A Butler (Defendants) (Feb 2011)  - The Fields Group were "Mulcted" and ordered to pay more than they had claimed in damages. 

More information about data recovery scams

* Watch the video below to see how these experts operate.

As can be seen in the video, had the victim not had help from the TV Investigators he would not have got his money or his drive back.
To be " mulcted in costs" is used in  legal fields, and essentially means to be punished by a fine