Possibly actually. I just tried to search for it, but couldn’t find it anywhere.
Okay boomer 
1 Like
It’s still there, just unlisted.
If you check out the annual Monzo awards from December, there’s a link to it there because it was one of my highlights from last year.
2 Likes
IANAL, but my understanding is this would only clearly be libel if she knows it’s not true. If she has a sincerely held belief that she’s speaking the truth, she’s entitled to her beliefs.
That’s one reason why libel cases are so hard to bring to court and win.
Anyone else swimming through drivel this morning hoping to find a Google investment announcement? 
2 Likes
When I saw 18 unread messages in ‘Monzo in the media’, I felt absolutely sure the announcement had dropped Most disappointing
1 Like
Just to clarify though there’s two slightly different things here because the girl in the video is saying Monzo can take your money.
Accounts can get frozen for a number of reasons and some of these will definitely be erroneous. As far as I know though, the final decision not to return money to someone can only be made by a court order sought by the NCA. So if someone is saying ‘Monzo closed my account AND kept all my money’, this is not going to be a Monzo error.
3 Likes
I know this is off topic, but it’s a topic of interest to me (though not the extent I think it could fuel its own thread), and I have to ask.
So is actual malice a thing in the U.K. too then? I didn’t think it was and that’s why libel lawsuits tend to be easier here.
I thought it was just a US rule, there to protect the first amendment right to free speech (so you can’t sue to silence or censor, because companies have certainly tried). It’s the actual malice standard, and if that applies, Monzo would need to prove that they are either knowingly telling porkie lies, or that they showed complete disregard for whether the claim that Monzo is a scam is true or not.
They’d never pass that hurdle in a jury trial based on her calling them a scam in the context of that TikTok video. It’s also the toughest hurdle to get past, and I don’t think they’d get past any of the easier ones either. You don’t even need to prove intent in the U.K, it’s not relevant like it is in the US.
AFAIK, in the U.K., they’d just have to prove the statement is false (which I don’t think is quite so black and white in this context; could go either way, maybe there’s precedent?), and that the statement caused serious Monzo harm. It hasn’t and it won’t. It’s nothing of any consequence. So it would fail there. At the same time it would have massive perception problems for Monzo, and those would do far harm than some customer calling them a scam on TikTok. So even if they could, and even if it was a winnable case, they’d be fools to actually bother pursuing it.
As fun as this hypothetical exercise is though, and I do enjoys these, it’s all a bit fruitless if you ask me.
Having dealt with liable through solicitors (we contested and won) before yes calling it a scam without being able to prove its a scam (its clearly not) is highly likely liable. In the UK, unlike USA the person making the claim has to prove the claim is true where as in the USA monzo would need to prove its not true.
She needs to be able to prove its a scam to avoid liable, she could have phrased things better and avoided it though potentially if she had appended it with “the way monzo treated me makes me think of it like a scam” but instead she directly calls it a scam.
Its worse on the internet as companies can directly see your reach to really rack up the potential reputational damage and the costs defending are very very prohibitive which is why most come to a settlement when its so clear cut.
If I recall in theory if you say a liable statement in England in public and one person hears it you are still liable but the damages will be less, the solicitor fees wont be though but with a huge amount seeing it the damages are not in your favour.
As a rule I would always avoid using scam sort of language describing companies unless you can back it up. Opinions are generally fine but declarative statements such as “scam” or calling someone a racist (twitter…) can end up in trouble.
Companies do go after these sorts of claims (in certain industries its far far too common to be honest) and the person usually pays them an agreed payment for damages and removes the claim as well as possibly posting a retort about how they were wrong, it depends but its usually pretty clear cut liable.
In Scotland things can be even worse as its different further in here.
I dont expect Monzo to go liable though or banks in general as it can cause the Streisand effect and cause far more reputational damage then the original comments but that doesnt mean they couldnt.
2 Likes
And they all seem to be under the impression that Monzo is renowned for being crypto friendly.
2 Likes
Nope.
Since the introduction of the 2013 Defamation Act, (DA 2013), which came into force on 1 January 2014, claimants must now also demonstrate that the publication of the statement caused, or is likely to cause, serious harm to their reputation. In the case of bodies trading for profit, the serious harm to its reputation needs to have caused, or be likely to cause, serious financial loss.
Depends.
There’s a defence of truth, in which case you’d need to prove it was a scam.
There’s also a defence of honest opinion in which case you’d need to show that a reasonable person would come to that opinion given the same set of circumstances.
There are about half a dozen other potential defences available.
At the end of the day it’s very expensive to bring libel cases, though the threat of one might concentrate people’s minds.
There’s also the Barbara Streisand effect to consider.
1 Like
Yeah that applies to both parties, many many people cave when the letter comes through.
3 Likes
Just FYI both of those are behind a paywall so we can’t read (though we have the announcement thread).
1 Like
I was able to read these earlier without a paywall - no idea why. I think the only ‘new’ information was that Monzo are looking to push their US expansion and are likely going to do the same in Europe. There was a comment from TS about being open to acquiring smaller companies as well.
1 Like
I’m paywalled as well now, but I think he said companies has approached Monzo looking to be acquired by Monzo! Coughfreetradecoughlunarcoughcough
3 Likes
In relation to this, might be worth mentioning that FT provides free access to secondary school staff and 16-19 year old students, and university staff and students can often access via their university library membership.
Obviously that doesn’t help everyone, but might help some.
2 Likes
You can read it here.