Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Members | Log In | Register

Female sues Match.com because her date attempted to murder her. Options · View
WellMadeMale
Posted: Thursday, March 07, 2013 9:18:29 PM

Rank: Constant Gardener

Joined: 9/30/2009
Posts: 10,212
Location: Cakeland, United States
Match.com set the two up in September 2010.

Just eight days after their first meeting, Beckman decided to cut things off, saying she'd sussed out his true nature. A few months later, Ridley snuck into her garage, assaulting her.


Alright so I have some compassion for this person, but is her situation truly the fault of Match.com or any other online dating service? There's too little information here in this little dollop of a story, to really tell what occurred between her and him.

How long had they communicated online or via phone before agreeing to meet?
How many dates did they have in that eight day period?
How did she end the dating...was she super vindictive, belittling, insulting beyond the pale?
Did he do and say enough weird or violent things that simply drove her to cover?

How is any of this the fault of Match.com?

When do we accept responsibility for the actions we take or initiate and what occurs during that process or down the road? Are there people really this naïve about meeting people online? I have some compassion for her situation, but she's also gotta be out of her fucking gourd to think she can sue a service provider in this manner and possibly recoup any compensation.


If ya can't beat 'em... pay someone to do it for you.
EDWolfe
Posted: Thursday, March 07, 2013 9:59:47 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 2/5/2013
Posts: 1,033
Location: United States
Something I noticed was weird is the fact that they only went out face-to-face for eight days, yet Ridley knew where Beckman lived to assault her. It sounds like she didn't use complete common sense when meeting Ridley. (meet in public, separate in public, until you know you can trust them)

Obviously Ridley was wrong for assaulting Beckman, and this was a very bad tragedy that could've ended worse. But Match.com isn't responsible for assessing the psychological profiles of all their members. Nor is any other dating or friend finder website, or even classifieds like Craigslist.

If she's suing anyone, she should sue Ridley. She might not be able to, however; with the criminal charge, the court might decide he's been punished enough.
Magical_felix
Posted: Friday, March 08, 2013 7:55:12 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 4/3/2010
Posts: 4,524
Location: California
That is like someone suing a coffee shop if they meet someone there that later assaults them. It doesn't make sense. I don't think match should put a disclaimer about dates being potentially dangerous either. That is just common sense. It's nerve racking enough to meet someone from online, a huge disclaimer saying "1 in 50 dates ends in attempted murder" will probably dry up the company's business.



ByronLord
Posted: Friday, March 08, 2013 8:23:24 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 11/14/2010
Posts: 716
Location: Massachusetts, United States
Magical_felix wrote:
That is like someone suing a coffee shop if they meet someone there that later assaults them. It doesn't make sense. I don't think match should put a disclaimer about dates being potentially dangerous either. That is just common sense. It's nerve racking enough to meet someone from online, a huge disclaimer saying "1 in 50 dates ends in attempted murder" will probably dry up the company's business.


Actually not.

Match.com exists for the purpose of getting people together, coffee shops do not. There is thus a duty of care and an expectation that Match.com would employ reasonable precautions to mitigate the risk of attack. Including warning people to meet in a public place, filtering out those reported as abusers, etc.

There is a duty of care but I don't think it is an unreasonable one or one that Match.com would have any difficulty meeting. They have serious people who are serious about safety. And their underwriters will make sure that they are taking reasonable steps before issuing their E&O policy.

So it is not a frivolous suit by any means. Whether she will win is another matter.

If I was working for Match.com or advising them I would be looking to keep a tight reign on the lawyers to STOP them from arguing that there is no duty of care because the whole value proposition of Match.com is based on the idea that there is.

Magical_felix
Posted: Friday, March 08, 2013 8:33:20 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 4/3/2010
Posts: 4,524
Location: California
ByronLord wrote:


Actually not.

Match.com exists for the purpose of getting people together, coffee shops do not. There is thus a duty of care and an expectation that Match.com would employ reasonable precautions to mitigate the risk of attack. Including warning people to meet in a public place, filtering out those reported as abusers, etc.

There is a duty of care but I don't think it is an unreasonable one or one that Match.com would have any difficulty meeting. They have serious people who are serious about safety. And their underwriters will make sure that they are taking reasonable steps before issuing their E&O policy.

So it is not a frivolous suit by any means. Whether she will win is another matter.

If I was working for Match.com or advising them I would be looking to keep a tight reign on the lawyers to STOP them from arguing that there is no duty of care because the whole value proposition of Match.com is based on the idea that there is.


But they do do that... All these sights have tons of online safety articles.



lafayettemister
Posted: Friday, March 08, 2013 8:43:29 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/4/2010
Posts: 6,341
Location: Alabama, United States
Once Person A decides to meet up with Person B, then Persons A & B are responsible for their own actions. No way Match.com can have any questionnaire that will reveal the true inner demons of anyone. If a friend or co-worker sets someone up on a blind date, would the friend/coworker be responsible if one person turns out to be a stalker? What about newspaper personal ads? No different than meeting someone at a bar, church, friend's house, work, anywhere.... anyone you meet anywhere or anyhow could turn out to be a whack-o.





When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. Socrates
Mazza
Posted: Friday, March 08, 2013 8:56:13 AM

Rank: Mazztastic

Joined: 9/20/2012
Posts: 2,839
Location: Scotland, United Kingdom
As a matter of interest, I recently read that the founder of Match.com's girlfriend left him, for someone she met on Match.com...

Quote:
Online dating is quickly becoming one of the most acceptable ways to start relationships. Match.com alone (a pay site) has over 1.8 million registered users! The site uses a complex algorithm that suggests people based not only on what people say they're looking for (hair color, age etc) but also on their browsing behavior on the site!

However, there was a time when online dating had a very negative connotation. Back in 1995, Gary Kremen saw potential for online dating and created Match.com. He faced a problem very early on... most people weren't dating online. He had EVERYONE on the company create a profile, including himself and his girlfriend, despite the fact that they were in a relationship.

While this may have helped the company grow the number of users, it also backfired for Kremen. His girlfriend met another man on Match.com and left him for him! Kremen later said that while it was painful, at least it showed him that the site worked! What an optimist!


(I don't know if that story is true or a sneaky publicity stunt, but it piqued my interest)

As for being sued, well, I agree that they do have a duty of care to some degree given their in-depth interview/application process, but like others have said, you can never truly know a person...

Be interesting to see how the case pans out and if it will impact the huge online dating market?
Dancing_Doll
Posted: Friday, March 08, 2013 11:14:18 AM

Rank: Alpha Blonde

Joined: 2/17/2010
Posts: 5,941
Location: In your dirty fantasies
I haven't been on Match.com, but I assume this is a free service or one that has a low basic entrance fee, right? It's not like they're paying $5K for specialized background checks on viable suitors and personalized matchmaking? In those cases, I think more of a case can be made - when you have a live human being vetting out prospects and personally suggesting possible matches.

If Match.com runs akin to AFF and other generic dating services, then the onus is on you to be cautious and do the background checking yourself. It's reasonable to assume that if all membership involves is providing them with a credit card to pay $19.99 a month and a do-it-yourself profile and intro system, that lunatics and psychos are also able to perform these basic tasks to get into the system.

I think it's simple logic. Ask yourself - when you signed up - did you have to provide a background check, criminal history or go through any other verifiable safety precautions? No? Ok, well neither did the people you're potentially going to meet and date. You get what you pay for.

I feel terrible for the woman - but she could have met this guy anywhere and suffered the same fate. It's not a legal issue, but more just a cautionary tale of things that can happen when you get involved with someone you don't know - whether it's the guy online or the guy you met in the bar last Friday night. Proceed with caution.


nicola
Posted: Friday, March 08, 2013 2:21:29 PM

Rank: Matriarch

Joined: 12/6/2006
Posts: 24,848
Location: Sydney, Australia
Absolutely ridiculous. Their site is basically a glorified database, matching member's variables (oh stop!), showing profile photos, and various ways for people to get in touch with each other. That's the same as the majority of those dating sites. Some have larger databases of members, and are better at pairing members than others, but that's all it boils down to.

What duty of care are they expected to perform? Background checks on their members?

The same thing could happen on Facebook, Craigslist, even lushstories.com. Would I be sued if a date between 2 members went horribly wrong?

The whole thing is absurd if you ask me.
crazydiamond
Posted: Friday, March 08, 2013 2:27:33 PM

Rank: Clever Gem

Joined: 7/17/2011
Posts: 2,285
Location: Exactly where I should be!, Canada
nicola wrote:
Absolutely ridiculous. Their site is basically a glorified database, matching member's variables (oh stop!), showing profile photos, and various ways for people to get in touch with each other. That's the same as the majority of those dating sites. Some have larger databases of members, and are better at pairing members than others, but that's all it boils down to.

What duty of care are they expected to perform? Background checks on their members?

The same thing could happen on Facebook, Craigslist, even lushstories.com. Would I be sued if a date between 2 members went horribly wrong?

The whole thing is absurd if you ask me.


It's all the free potatoes fault Nicola (all the good sites are giving them away), sue them!! It makes people crazy!! All them dammit carbohydrates, to much energy on thier hands I reckon. kekekegay

latinfoxy
Posted: Friday, March 08, 2013 3:09:13 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 4/5/2011
Posts: 816
Location: Here
I have never been in one of this sites before so after reading this thread, i went to match.com to see what the deal was. I found two things, 1. they have one in Venezuela LOL (laughing because this can not be safe in this country) 2. they don't even check your email account when you sign in.

I spent less than 5 minutes there and it was enough to be sure that the person that is suing them is just a moron! Come on!! how can you make this website accountable for your safety, when you know that they dont even check that the mail that you signed in with its actually yours!!

This just shows that there is too many people without common sense, and just waiting for everyone else to take care of them!

BTW Nicola thanks for giving me the idea of suing lushstories, im not sure why im suing yet, but my lawyers will let you know. Im sure something as brilliant as this will come up! evil4
nicola
Posted: Friday, March 08, 2013 3:29:02 PM

Rank: Matriarch

Joined: 12/6/2006
Posts: 24,848
Location: Sydney, Australia
latinfoxy wrote:
BTW Nicola thanks for giving me the idea of suing lushstories, im not sure why im suing yet, but my lawyers will let you know. Im sure something as brilliant as this will come up! evil4


Eh?

We validate emails and log IP addresses, for legal reasons. That's more than we're obliged to do.

Site owners like myself can't be expected to ask for the ID of everyone that joins up. Around 200 people a day join, we'd need a full-time admin assistant for one thing!

Can you imagine picking up some person in a bar, it ends up going wrong, and then you sue the pub? lol.
latinfoxy
Posted: Friday, March 08, 2013 3:56:29 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 4/5/2011
Posts: 816
Location: Here
nicola wrote:


Can you imagine picking up some person in a bar, it ends up going wrong, and then you sue the pub? lol.


LOL i know!! its just moronic! d'oh!
ByronLord
Posted: Friday, March 08, 2013 4:52:38 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 11/14/2010
Posts: 716
Location: Massachusetts, United States
nicola wrote:
Absolutely ridiculous. Their site is basically a glorified database, matching member's variables (oh stop!), showing profile photos, and various ways for people to get in touch with each other. That's the same as the majority of those dating sites. Some have larger databases of members, and are better at pairing members than others, but that's all it boils down to.

What duty of care are they expected to perform? Background checks on their members?

The same thing could happen on Facebook, Craigslist, even lushstories.com. Would I be sued if a date between 2 members went horribly wrong?

The whole thing is absurd if you ask me.


There is actually a test for what is reasonable called the Hands test. Basically if the cost of the harm times the probability of the harm is greater than the control measure and there is a duty of care then there is a duty to implement the measure.

The reason people pay Match.com for the service is because they say they check member IDs and provide other safety measures. So they have explicitly accepted a duty of care. I can't see background checks being reasonable, the cost of doing them is very high and the likelihood that they would identify a rapist rather low.

If on the other hand another member had reported the person as an attacker/stalker whatever and Match.com had ignored it AND there was no mechanism in place to deal with such reports AND Match.com could be shown to be aware of them as being useful. Well then they would likely have a liability problem.

I really don't think it very likely that Match.com has met the standard for negligence here. But the legal definition of 'reasonable' for IAC (owner of Match.com) with a public listing and 3.5 billion market cap is very different to the definition that would apply to Lush.

Delphi
Posted: Friday, March 08, 2013 5:14:10 PM

Rank: Story Verifier

Joined: 6/30/2012
Posts: 1,186
Location: United States
We do everything we can to protect ourselves from harm. The fact of the matter is that our lives and the people in it aren't always predictable. Thus, neither the victim or match.com is to blame. Only the criminal.

It's too bad the victim can't see that. She probably needs psychiatric help more than legal right now.



The Delphi/NaughtyNurse collaboration - a Recommended Read
niceguy89
Posted: Friday, March 08, 2013 5:26:37 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 11/16/2009
Posts: -24
Location: Texas, United States
There is only one way Match.com could be blamed. If they gave out the woman's address to her attacker. However if the woman did that herself she can not blame Match.com. It is tragic that it happened but the woman should take better care when meeting strangers.
nicola
Posted: Friday, March 08, 2013 5:34:42 PM

Rank: Matriarch

Joined: 12/6/2006
Posts: 24,848
Location: Sydney, Australia
@ ByronLord - I know what you're getting at, and the fact that people have to pay to be members, makes it slightly different.

The fact is though, that this guy could have been absolutely squeaky clean, a background check would probably have revealed nothing, certainly nothing about his psychological issues.

I wrote this proviso into our terms and conditions, I think it should be enough to cover our backs, should anything unforeseen happen (heaven forbid):

Quote:
You are solely responsible for your conduct (and the conduct of anyone using your account) while using our Service, including the Content you provide. Just as in the real world, things you do within our site can subject you to criminal, civil or regulatory penalties. We are not responsible or liable for anything you do online.
ByronLord
Posted: Friday, March 08, 2013 6:55:17 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 11/14/2010
Posts: 716
Location: Massachusetts, United States
nicola wrote:
@ ByronLord - I know what you're getting at, and the fact that people have to pay to be members, makes it slightly different.

The fact is though, that this guy could have been absolutely squeaky clean, a background check would probably have revealed nothing, certainly nothing about his psychological issues.

I wrote this proviso into our terms and conditions, I think it should be enough to cover our backs, should anything unforeseen happen (heaven forbid):


I can't see the case getting very far unless Match.com did something pretty egregious.

But T&C are a contract and you can't exclude negligence in a contract. I suspect that the real strategy here is to get Match.com to pay up or face more bad publicity over this while they are selling themselves as a 'safe' match site.

If they don't provide some controls then OKCupid does the same thing better and for free!

Tranquil
Posted: Friday, March 08, 2013 7:56:18 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/31/2013
Posts: 2,088
Location: Curled up in front of a beautiful fire
WellMadeMale wrote:
Match.com set the two up in September 2010.

Just eight days after their first meeting, Beckman decided to cut things off, saying she'd sussed out his true nature. A few months later, Ridley snuck into her garage, assaulting her.




Sorry but did they go on 8 dates? or 1 in 8 days...? just curious as to when her six sense kicked in.



[i]Poem : The Cyber Touch http://www.lushstories.com/stories/love-poems/the-cyber-touch.aspx
Poem : The Last Moments http://www.lushstories.com/stories/love-poems/the-last-moments.aspx
Story : One day only http://www.lushstories.com/stories/oral-sex/one-day-only.aspx
Poem: My Toy http://www.lushstories.com/stories/erotic-poems/my-toy.aspx#comments/i]



Sex is an emotion in motion (Mae West).
An Ounce of performance is worth pounds of promises (Mae West)
I wrote the story myself. It's about a girl who lost her reputation and never missed it. (Mae West)
WellMadeMale
Posted: Friday, March 08, 2013 8:33:26 PM

Rank: Constant Gardener

Joined: 9/30/2009
Posts: 10,212
Location: Cakeland, United States
I think some of us live in la la land.

I've used Match.com many times and I never expected them to weed out the whackjobs from the trophy catches for me.

It's a fucking hookup site and a great place for married people to cheat with each other on their spouses & insignificant others.

You get what you pay for. The main reason people use match.com is to get laid. The secondary reason is there are gold diggers of both genders out to pull a fast one over on someone else.

Match.com goes out of its way (much more in-depth than other sites), to alert their members to use common sense and not hand out phone numbers or home addresses prematurely. They've got their asses covered.

You're a riot, Byron.

If ya can't beat 'em... pay someone to do it for you.
Guest
Posted: Sunday, March 10, 2013 1:48:24 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 470,086
Maybe some day they might be able to hold a match making site liable, like after enough people get murdered by the new trend of internet psycho's. The related story of the guy with almost 900 facebook friends that murdered his date and killed himself demonstrates that hooking up thru the internet might not be such a bright idea. I wouldn't be surprised if somewhere down the road that match sights aren't somehow held accountable.

cheeseball
Posted: Sunday, March 10, 2013 8:24:46 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/19/2013
Posts: 167
Location: Chicago, United States
These days in the USA people sue people for a variety of reasons, some reasonable, some not. I don't think this one will hold up in court.
Buz
Posted: Sunday, March 10, 2013 8:31:17 PM

Rank: The Linebacker

Joined: 3/2/2011
Posts: 5,149
Location: Atlanta, United States
So many people in America don't believe in personal responsibility. If they make a bad decision they want to blame someone else. "Everyone is a victim." So we have a legal climate in which frivolous lawsuits are no longer considered frivolous. Also, the court system is so expensive and unpredictable that I wouldn't doubt that Match.com doesn't decide that it is less expensive to offer her an out of court settlement. I would rather they fight it and make her eat the court costs, that is unless Match.com did something highly irresponsible that has not come to light. I don't believe that happened though.

I have written a new poem. It is called 'Long Twisty Woman.'
You can read it at: http://www.lushstories.com/stories/erotic-poems/long-twisty-woman.aspxx
Also, if you wish, check out my co-authored a story with the wonderful DanielleX. It is called 'Focus on Sex.'
You can read it at: http://www.lushstories.com/stories/quickie-sex/focused-on-sex-1.aspx

Andee
Posted: Sunday, March 10, 2013 8:41:59 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 3/7/2013
Posts: 123
Location: Mostly the couch, Canada
Buz wrote:
So many people in America don't believe in personal responsibility. If they make a bad decision they want to blame someone else. "Everyone is a victim." So we have a legal climate in which frivolous lawsuits are no longer considered frivolous. Also, the court system is so expensive and unpredictable that I wouldn't doubt that Match.com doesn't decide that it is less expensive to offer her an out of court settlement. I would rather they fight it and make her eat the court costs, that is unless Match.com did something highly irresponsible that has not come to light. I don't believe that happened though.


Exactly ... do your homework, some of us actually had to learn to date BEFORE the Internet.

"If you knew what you were doing you would probably be bored."

Highwayman
Posted: Sunday, March 10, 2013 11:21:04 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/10/2012
Posts: 1,498
Saw Match.com and decided not to read the other responses although two of my favorite people are responding. Favorite, because they make sense.

So, was sitting around with a colleague. She, an attorney, me, her humble squire. Now, considering that her "friends" are the ones subscribing to this avenue, I don't see how those who are like mannered can give themselves to such drivel.

Do I honestly think I can ascertain his/her smile and tone without a profile? Do I subject myself to pedantic interpretation of a fellow human being during a lunch? I just don't know if can trust myself? Match.com, take me away.

‎"The true mystery of the world is the visible, not the invisible." --Wilde
Guest
Posted: Monday, March 11, 2013 1:47:35 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 470,086
She sounds like the type that would sue the gas company where she fueled up just prior to running the stop sign and broadsiding the vehicle in the intersection. "But your Honor...If they hadn't sold me that gas I would have been on empty and couldn't have driven the car. Let alone running a stop sign and running into somebody. So, it's their fault."bs bs bs bs bs
Kitanica
Posted: Monday, March 11, 2013 2:55:51 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 4/16/2011
Posts: 882
Location: The Sprawl, United States
If your meeting strangers through an Internet based third party your accepting a certain level of risk, no service (even one you pay for) can be 100% thorough and read the minds of potential suitors. Theres no way of knowing someones intentions, even if you could that couldn't protect you from someone unstable who could randomly snap or lose touch with reality a few minutes later. Your going out to meet people. Your just as likely to encounter an assailant in a bar downtown as a dating site.

After several months were either of them still members? How'd he get the address?
adagio_sabadicus
Posted: Monday, March 11, 2013 3:48:26 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/24/2013
Posts: 1,246
Suing is America's favorite sport followed by killing with assault weapons and collecting tattoos
adagio_sabadicus
Posted: Monday, March 11, 2013 3:54:56 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/24/2013
Posts: 1,246
Anyone ignorant enough to match up after listening to 'a line" of BS should have senior citizens discount card taken away. It's like Olive Oyl meets Yosomite Sam.
Kitanica
Posted: Tuesday, March 12, 2013 2:51:17 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 4/16/2011
Posts: 882
Location: The Sprawl, United States
adagio wrote:
Suing is America's favorite sport followed by killing with assault weapons and collecting tattoos


What's an "assault weapon?" a black gun? More people die each year from being hit Barefisted. Semi-automatic rifles hardly even factor into US gun deaths compared to the thousands of small caliber deaths involved in violent crimes, and possible gang-drug related violence. So it's more like eating exorbitant amounts of food and polluting then suing. Pollutings probably first.
Users browsing this topic
Guest 


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS

Powered by Yet Another Forum.net version 1.9.1.6 (NET v4.0) - 11/14/2007
Copyright © 2003-2006 Yet Another Forum.net. All rights reserved.