A landmark legal battle unmasking the operator of a gossip website ‘built to monetise people’s misery’ could reshape how wealthy individuals tackle anonymous reputational attacks online. The corporate investigators who traced the man behind Tattle Life tell Spear’s how the case could have far-reaching effects for HNWs.
Last week, Belfast’s High Court lifted reporting restrictions on naming the defendants in the first-of-its-kind libel case that saw Northern Irish business couple Neil and Donna Sands awarded £300,000 in damages and legal costs over what they called ‘hate speech’ posted about them in a 45-page thread on Tattle Life.
Attracting up to 12 million visitors a month, the site allows members of the public to anonymously discuss high-profile figures and private individuals, with its previously unknown owner profiting from ads on the website.
In his ruling, Mr Justice McAlinden described the site as ‘peddling untruths for profit’.
[See also: Do you need reputation insurance?]
Malicious online actors unmasked
The suspected operator, Englishman Sebastian Bond, was identified through a global investigation led by the corporate intelligence firm Nardello & Co. A series of freezing orders were issued in 2023 in a bid to trace Bond, 43, who has run the site under the pseudonym Helen McDougal since 2017. Bond fled the UK during legal proceedings, while moving large amounts of cash from UK banks to accounts around the world.
The Sands, successful entrepreneurs who funded their case, are not alone in being targeted by anonymous online attacks. Alan Kennedy, managing director at Nardello & Co, said his team has seen a growing number of HNW clients – individuals both in and out of the limelight – affected by reputational damage online.
Content from our partners
He said the Sands’ victory signals a positive development for libel cases involving anonymous harassment and online defamation and is a sign to online instigators of abuse, such as those who begin or comment on such threads, to ‘be careful what they do’.
Kennedy said the case shows that even sophisticated operators can be identified and held accountable.
‘People can fight back,’ said Kennedy. ‘Sometimes they think, “oh, let’s just put up with this online abuse”.’ He added that the case is a reminder that anonymity does not guarantee impunity. ‘There is a way of finding out who these [malicious] actors are and putting a stop to it.’
Capitalising on upending lives
While Tattle Life’s long-running thread on the Sands was easily found and overtly damaging, the ways in which reputational attacks unfold can branch out into less obvious mediums, Kennedy said.
‘In elaborate schemes we’ve uncovered cases of fake accounts, newly made websites – sites posing as not-for-profit organisations – married with articles placed in mainstream outlets that seem legitimate, combined with leaflets handed out in the street to damage clients’ reputations. We’ve identified troll farms and even seen the involvement of communications firms engaged in less than positive campaigns’.
While the Sands are a reasonably high-profile couple who promote their business enterprises on social media, those without a visible online presence are not immune.
Kennedy said one client with no public profile still saw false claims linking them to criminal groups published in obscure online outlets. These were picked up by bank compliance teams and led to accounts being frozen.
[See also: The reputational risk of being ‘named and shamed’ as a tax defaulter by HMRC]
‘These cases are not just a result of people who enjoy being abusive online, there can be a commercial gain in having people’s lives upended by this kind of thing.’
‘It’s not only compliance teams at banks, it’s prospective or existing business partners that can have very damaging effects on clients and for them to try to fix these things is quite difficult.’
Robust surveillance
Finn Duggan, a senior analyst at Nardello & Co, added that a ‘robust monitoring protocol’ is essential – one that goes beyond Google alerts and social media trawls. More proactive surveillance can flag bubbling reputational threats before they escalate.
Kennedy added that many clients struggle to tell whether reputational attacks are spontaneous or part of an orchestrated campaign.
Speaking after the case, entrepreneur Mr Sands said: ‘We believe in free speech but not consequence-free speech; particularly where it is intended to, and succeeds in, causing real-world damage to people’s lives, livelihoods and mental health.’
‘We knew we had a challenge on our hands and it wasn’t always easy but we got there in the end,’ Kennedy said.
While the case demonstrates a clear victory against anonymous online operators, Sands also warned that the protracted legal battle ‘took a lot of time, effort and expense’.
