Scandal Ex-Swan Simon Phillips hit with $10K defamation payout

Remove this Banner Ad

Ron The Bear

Up yer arse, AFL
30k Posts 10k Posts
Jul 4, 2006
35,845
36,728
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
* Bearing in mind the seemingly very harsh judgement against Phillips, might be prudent to exercise caution in commenting *

Former Sydney Swans player found to have defamed businesswoman (paywalled)

An ex-AFL player’s fight for a $21 refund has cost him $10,000 after a tribunal found he defamed the seller by calling her a “thief” on Facebook.

The post, by former Sydney Swans forward Simon Phillips, was found to have dashed the hopes Canberra businesswoman Louise Curtis had of becoming a director of rival AFL club Greater Western Sydney.


Phillips’ wife bought $32 worth of invitations and labels for their daughter’s first birthday party from Ms Curtis’ business Pink Frosting in January this year.

But the supplies never arrived, apparently because of a flood, then a fire and finally a broken printer.

Ms Curtis agreed to a partial $21 refund but that didn’t turn up either, due to an IT issue.

After Mr Phillips rang and emailed Pink Frosting to no avail he searched the internet and found “a number of complaints” about her business on productreview.com.au.

That number was nearly 1000, out of about 1200 reviews.

In its decision, published earlier this month, the ACT Administrative Tribunal said these complaints were “hearsay”.

Mr Phillips, who played five games for the Swans in 2006-07, then came across a Facebook page named “Pink Frosting are thieves: they owe me or people I know money", and posted "Louise is thieving innocent hard working Australians praying that we will all give up chasing her for a refund while in the middle of it all those who miss out are actually our kids."

ACT Fair Trading began investigating Pink Frosting in 2018 over unfulfilled orders and in September this year the territory’s parliament heard the business was “likely to have breached Australian consumer law” but “a full enforcement outcome was not pursued” because it had shut.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

He's just an average schmoe like the rest of us except that he played a handful of AFL games a while back.

Such a high proportion of negative feedback strongly suggests a problem with the business. How is it that the business is allowed to escape proper investigation by the responsible authority simply by closing its doors, while criticism leads to a fine which I assume will be a major financial impost?

I expect anyone who's been on the wrong side of an online transaction gone bad would empathise with Phillips.
 
The takeout for me was Louise Curtis was in line to become a Director for GWS

Surly Phillips one bad review would not have been the influencing factor given there were another 1000 bad reviews of her business online?

More of a concern that given the abysmal reviews of her business she would have been considered to be on the board (if she ever was)
 
Last edited:
* Bearing in mind the seemingly very harsh judgement against Phillips, might be prudent to exercise caution in commenting *

Former Sydney Swans player found to have defamed businesswoman (paywalled)

An ex-AFL player’s fight for a $21 refund has cost him $10,000 after a tribunal found he defamed the seller by calling her a “thief” on Facebook.

The post, by former Sydney Swans forward Simon Phillips, was found to have dashed the hopes Canberra businesswoman Louise Curtis had of becoming a director of rival AFL club Greater Western Sydney.


Phillips’ wife bought $32 worth of invitations and labels for their daughter’s first birthday party from Ms Curtis’ business Pink Frosting in January this year.

But the supplies never arrived, apparently because of a flood, then a fire and finally a broken printer.

Ms Curtis agreed to a partial $21 refund but that didn’t turn up either, due to an IT issue.

After Mr Phillips rang and emailed Pink Frosting to no avail he searched the internet and found “a number of complaints” about her business on productreview.com.au.

That number was nearly 1000, out of about 1200 reviews.

In its decision, published earlier this month, the ACT Administrative Tribunal said these complaints were “hearsay”.

Mr Phillips, who played five games for the Swans in 2006-07, then came across a Facebook page named “Pink Frosting are thieves: they owe me or people I know money", and posted "Louise is thieving innocent hard working Australians praying that we will all give up chasing her for a refund while in the middle of it all those who miss out are actually our kids."

ACT Fair Trading began investigating Pink Frosting in 2018 over unfulfilled orders and in September this year the territory’s parliament heard the business was “likely to have breached Australian consumer law” but “a full enforcement outcome was not pursued” because it had shut.
Truth is a counter against a claim of defamation but clearly the tribunal wasn't convinced. Maybe she had a better lawyer. 1000 of 1200 mostly one star reviews on that site suggests something's not above board but proving it is another thing entirely. He'd probably have been OK if he'd put IMO in front of his comments or "based on my experience". If the rest of the reviews on that site are even remotely accurate GWS should be thanking him. Come on Giants. Give the guy $10k. I liked the good old days when dodgy operators were chased down the street with a TV camera. "Mr B, why won't you talk to us. This isn't your house Mr B" "We can see you hiding behind the bins Mr B. We just want to ask some questions" "Mr B you can't punch our cameraman like that" "Oh yeah, get that thing out my f&*kin" face". Now we have Facebook comments ! What's the world come to ?
 
He's just an average schmoe like the rest of us except that he played a handful of AFL games a while back.

Such a high proportion of negative feedback strongly suggests a problem with the business. How is it that the business is allowed to escape proper investigation by the responsible authority simply by closing its doors, while criticism leads to a fine which I assume will be a major financial impost?

I expect anyone who's been on the wrong side of an online transaction gone bad would empathise with Phillips.
Flogs shouldn't whinge on Facebook.

The Facebook whinge is the lowest form of whinge.

Whatever happened to the old 'wait out the front for them' style of 'complaint'?
 
Flogs shouldn't whinge on Facebook.

The Facebook whinge is the lowest form of whinge.

Whatever happened to the old 'wait out the front for them' style of 'complaint'?

I still empathise. According to the article, Fair Trading investigated for two years. How long does it take to determine whether a company is breaking the law repeatedly?

Social media obviously can't be a platform to unjustly defame others, but if a business gave me a string of excuses like those listed, I would probably arrive at a similar conclusion to Phillips.

Drawing a long bow to say that Phillips alone cost this woman a board position. Hope someone offers to undertake an appeal on his behalf and calls GWS directors to give evidence.
 
Last edited:
I still empathise. According to the article, Fair Trading investigated for two years. How long does it take to determine whether a company is breaking the law repeatedly?

Social media obviously can't be a platform to unjustly defame others, but if a business gave me a string of excuses like those listed, I would probably arrive at a similar conclusion to Phillips.

Drawing a long bow to say that Phillips alone cost this woman a board position. Hope someone offers to undertake an appeal on his behalf and calls GWS directors to give evidence.

Regardless, if someone isn't a thief (or at least you can't prove they are), then you can't publicly spread it that they are.

Having said that, the whole thing is odd. I'd wager it's just yet another load of s**t article that has been poorly researched and serves the sole purpose of making people outraged.

I mean, how could someone who supposedly/allegedly can't run a simple online business be capable of being a director on a board anyway?

Why $10k? Aren't footy club boards voluntary? Where on earth would that figure come from?

Wasn't the the term 'thief' used on the page's actually title itself? Presumably the page owner was sued also?

FWIW, if I'd done such a s**t job of running an online store and were as shady as those people say, I'd rather keep it quiet rather making it all public for a measly $10k.

The whole thing is a bit odd.


It's weird though, people whinge about the whole 'cancel culture' thing - yet get upset when one of the cancellers gets put back in their box.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

It's weird though, people whinge about the whole 'cancel culture' thing - yet get upset when one of the cancellers gets put back in their box.

I think that's a whole other argument. This is about a financial dispute and a business's questionable conduct. There may well be some important detail omitted from the report, e.g. did Phillips specifically refer to the woman's aspirations regarding the GWS board and post against her suitability?

As far as Phillips is concerned, he paid for goods he didn't receive. I'm not saying that makes the business "thieves" by definition, but it could definitely have appeared that way to Phillips.

Not sure what legal benchmarks apply at a tribunal. Seems ripe to end up in a proper court.
 
They left out star before his name.
I played against him 1 game and he kicked 7 from the midfield and had 40+ touches before my mate tripped him face first into the cricket pitch. His twin brother Chris kicked 2 from back pocket.

Was a star junior like most AFL players.

This story erks me, based on the article this business clearly stole from him and he posts a genuine review similar to 1000 others and he gets the 10,000 fine?

Surely all you need to prove is that you paid and then didn't get your goods or refund.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top