BlyGilmore

One of the companies I hadn't heard of was pretty aggressive, even months after I'd chosen another company. I wonder if they were affiliated with Lending Tree.

SarraJK

WhirlyBird

pfblueprint

hi

Libel requires it to be **false** and defamatory, and sometimes **knowingly** false and defamatory.

Skeptic

Was this the comment?

LT was not hacked. LT has a web access system and high paid LOs making an average of $7,500 per Interest Only ARM Loan for LTs internal lending division, LT Loans. To understand LT Loans and the level of senior management driven crime, Google for the lawsuit where LendingTree promises "When banks compete you win". This lawsuit stems from the reality that the consumer's identity info went only to their own internal lender LT Loans. LT Loans then displayed wholesaler names as lenders to the consumer and closed loans internally with LT Loans.
Yes the LendingTree Senior Team knew there was risk in letting LT Loans manage their own leads without matching to lenders on their network as the original business model was founded on. Each person on the senior team had a million dollar+ bonus based upon LT Loan Revenue- would you imagine the smiles arround the table in senior team meetings when it was decided weekly that it is ok to match only to LT Loans with million dollar+ bonuses?
Note that the CEOs on both coasts and most of the VPs on that senior team have decided to pursue family interests after their bonus payouts in cash and stock incentives. The senior team laid off people who managed their systems, and then their senior team was negligent in managing consumer data. Loan Officers stopped making high commissions and sold consumer identities to multiple dishonest lenders. LendingTree Senior Executives did not deactivate passwords to the systems that hold the 70+ consumer data fields including your address, your cell phone number, and your social security number.
Do you think while having weekly senior team meetings each and every senior executive with a bonus based upon margins at Lending Tree Loans choose not see the risk in sending consumer information to an internal entity without monitoring simple password deactivation? For more than 6 months, 10,000 new consumer records a day- the senior team continued to allow LT Loans to operate without shutting down passwords in their legacy systems.
Don't believe it?
Here is the still public link to the LendingTree consumer data- [REDACTED AT THE REQUEST OF LENDING TREE LEGAL REPRESENTATION] link to the FBI Mortgage Fraud Division. [www.fbi.gov]
[tips.fbi.gov] Identity Theft Fraud for Profit and by Senior LendingTree Executives is a possible topic. The FBI has a field office in Charlotte about 30 minutes from LendingTree so take the 3 minutes to file an online form. Of course this is just my opinion…

whoops, another copy exists!

pfblueprint

charodon

mikelotus

[www.casp.net]

[www.casp.net]

note: these are only CA cases

Crazytree

Actually, our friends in Congress, through the Communications Decency Act (47 U.S.C. § 230), have shielded website operators from liability for publishing defamatory posts so long as it doesn't seem like the websites are doing anything that resembles filtering, editing, or authoring the posts. In fact, in most states, they don't even have to remove the posts despite being on actual notice of the defamatory content.

The best that a "victim" can do is file a lawsuit against a "Doe" defendant and then subpoena the IP records from the website. If they're able to identify the poster, then they can substitute him/her for the "Doe" and go from there. Plus, most complaints-oriented websites have language in their TOS that provide that content will be removed upon a court order, which the "victim" can usually get via a preliminary injunction (even one that's not contested because there's a "Doe" defendant). You just have to find a judge that's willing to go with you on it.

nobodygrrl

@Chongo: I was wondering about that too. I imagine you can refuse, but you could be subpoenaed?

spinachdip

Get Consumerist! =P

The comment (I think. It was the only one at that link):

LT was not hacked. LT has a web access system and high paid LOs making an average of $7,500 per Interest Only ARM Loan for LTs internal lending division, LT Loans. To understand LT Loans and the level of senior management driven crime, Google for the lawsuit where LendingTree promises "When banks compete you win". This lawsuit stems from the reality that the consumer's identity info went only to their own internal lender LT Loans. LT Loans then displayed wholesaler names as lenders to the consumer and closed loans internally with LT Loans.
Yes the LendingTree Senior Team knew there was risk in letting LT Loans manage their own leads without matching to lenders on their network as the original business model was founded on. Each person on the senior team had a million dollar+ bonus based upon LT Loan Revenue- would you imagine the smiles arround the table in senior team meetings when it was decided weekly that it is ok to match only to LT Loans with million dollar+ bonuses?
Note that the CEOs on both coasts and most of the VPs on that senior team have decided to pursue family interests after their bonus payouts in cash and stock incentives. The senior team laid off people who managed their systems, and then their senior team was negligent in managing consumer data. Loan Officers stopped making high commissions and sold consumer identities to multiple dishonest lenders. LendingTree Senior Executives did not deactivate passwords to the systems that hold the 70+ consumer data fields including your address, your cell phone number, and your social security number.
Do you think while having weekly senior team meetings each and every senior executive with a bonus based upon margins at Lending Tree Loans choose not see the risk in sending consumer information to an internal entity without monitoring simple password deactivation? For more than 6 months, 10,000 new consumer records a day- the senior team continued to allow LT Loans to operate without shutting down passwords in their legacy systems.
Don't believe it?
Here is the still public link to the LendingTree consumer data- [REDACTED AT THE REQUEST OF LENDING TREE LEGAL REPRESENTATION] link to the FBI Mortgage Fraud Division. [www.fbi.gov]
[tips.fbi.gov] Identity Theft Fraud for Profit and by Senior LendingTree Executives is a possible topic. The FBI has a field office in Charlotte about 30 minutes from LendingTree so take the 3 minutes to file an online form. Of course this is just my opinion…

Daniel

Chongo

It looks like Lending Tree threw out the "defamatory" out there to scare the little blogger who may not have taken Media Law in college.

spinachdip

Key phrase: "FALSE and defamatory speech"

Emphasis mine. Defamatory statements that have the virtue of being true are a horse of a different color.

BigElectricCat

This is all moot of course, as publishers aren't held liable for libel committed by commenters, but you can see why publishers need to be explicitly protected.

spinachdip

[en.wikipedia.org]

AT203

lightaugust

Buran

Thats the truth, I swear it.

m4ximusprim3

I guess I wouldn't have given this a second thought since the blog wasn't the origination source, nor was the blogger the author.

I can see the implied link now.

Techguy1138

The giveaway is the word defamatory; which is part of the legalese related to libel/slander lawsuits.

JiminyChristmas

GLOBAL TELEMEDIA INTERNATIONAL, Inc.; Jonathon Bentley-Stevens; Regina S. Peralta, Plaintiffs,
v.
DOE 1 aka BUSTEDAGAIN40; Doe 2 aka ELECTRICK_MAN; Doe 3 aka BDAMAN609;
and Does 4 through 35, inclusive, Defendants.

U.S. District Court, Central District of California

No. SA CV 00-1155 DOC (EEx)

Crazytree

"It is rife with defamatory comments about LendingTree officers."

Which parts, specifically, are alleged to be defamatory? And how does Mr./Ms. Attorney arrive at that conclusion?

"We would very much appreciate you doing as other blogs have done with this exact comment by removing it entirely."

1) I doubt other blogs have done that.

2) Why remove the *entire* comment?

Looks more like damage control to me.

BigElectricCat

socritic

The filing of an anti-SLAPP motion prevents the plaintiff from amending the complaint and stays all discovery. If the special motion is denied, the filing of an appeal immediately stays the trial court proceedings as to each challenged cause of action. Defendants prevailing on an anti-SLAPP motion (including any subsequent appeal) are entitled to a mandatory award of reasonable attorney's fees. More than 200 published court opinions have interpreted and applied California's anti-SLAPP law.

California's Code of Civil Procedure § 425.17 corrects abuse of the anti-SLAPP statute (CCP § 425.16). Signed into law on September 6, 2003, this statute prohibits anti-SLAPP motions in response to certain public interest lawsuits and class actions, and actions that arise from commercial statements or conduct. Section 425.18, signed into law on October 6, 2005, was enacted to facilitate SLAPP victims in recovering their damages through a SLAPPback (malicious prosecution action) against the SLAPP filers and their attorneys after the underlying SLAPP has been dismissed."

Crazytree

SuffolkHouse

Defamatory? Doesn't it have to be false to be defamatory?

Tzepish

Sue the fuck out of me. Have at it.

Squeegoth

khiltd

Techguy1138

khiltd

Big Flicker

khiltd

Pylon83