Our response to the Daily Mail article re Tereza Burki

UPDATE on 21 March 2019 - Seventy Thirty was granted permission to appeal.

The Daily Mail published an article on 2ndNovember full of inaccurate and foul statements by Ms Tereza Burki starting from the headline “didn’t find her a single match – and then sued HER when she complained”. As you can see from the judgment, Seventy Thirty did in fact find Ms Burki 5 matches in 11 weeks of Ms Burki’s membership, out of 12 months that she signed up for. In the court Ms Burki admitted that all the 5 men were suitable for her, and the Judge found them to be fulfilling her criteria. We didn’t sue Tereza Burki because she complained, but because she wrote lies and defamatory statements online of which the Judge found Tereza Burki liable and we were awarded £5000. Tereza Burki was also given an injunction order stating “Tereza Burki shall not print, distribute defamatory statements about Seventy Thirty”.

The Daily Mail wrote “For a hugely bright private wealth consultant who has racked up goodness knows how many millions of pounds for her well-heeled clients over the years”. However, Tereza Burki informed us she is unemployed, and when previously checked on Companies House website and her business REGERI LTD, it showed that it had a £884 turnover for the two past consecutive years. And the second company she claims on Linkedin she runs for the past 10 years called Children Manage Money https://www.linkedin.com/in/tereza-burki-55110a2/, she incorporated actually in 2016 and has been dormant according to Companies House records https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/09969375/filing-history

The Daily Mail wrote: “7,000 of the most desirable and affluent singletons on the planet on their books” we never told Ms Burki this; nor the “7000” number, nor “desirable people on the planet”, and this can be checked in the Judgment. Mr Lemarc Thomas told her “suitable number of members”.

The Daily Mail wrote: “a revolutionary psychological profiling service” such a thing doesn’t exist, as we are not a psychiatric hospital. Psychological profiling was developed by the FBI, to profile criminals. Seventy Thirty is not the par of The Federal Bureau of Investigation. Ms Burki’s fabrication is running wild, sorry to say. Profiling is conducted by a psychologist – that is all.  

The Daily Mail wrote: “What followed was, well . . . nothing.” Incredibly inaccurate and misleading. The fact is; what followed was 11 weeks of her membership, and 5 profiles she accepted in the court were suitable, as she accepted those 5 profiles while still a member (Judge also found them suitable), she rejected only 1 man, but 4 men rejected to meet her. Ms Burki signed a 12 months contract; she broke the contract after only 11 weeks. Perhaps if she remained a member she would be in a relationship today. Please refer to the Judgment, as you will see how Ms Burki admits that the 5 profiles offered to her were great, and genuine members, as we had to show evidence in court.  

Our solicitors are presented with an email from Tereza Burki’s neighbour from the building where she rents her flat in London, who told us how she is always “short of money” so when she goes on holiday she sub-lets her flat to tourists. 

Ms Burki states in her interview: “And someone promises you can have that eternal happiness if you just pay whatever and sign here’ First of all, she was never promised “eternal happiness” as we are not a religious organisation, but rather a limited company. Second, Ms Burki had our legal documents with her for over a year before she signed them stating that she read and understood our documents, and they are printed in font size 12, therefore cannot be considered a small print. Third, Ms Burki paid the first instalment in December 2014 and the last at the end of January 2015, so there was lot of time to read again our legal documents in font size 12. 

The Daily Mail writes: “When she demanded her money back, Ms Burki, who was attracted to the agency’s promise of discretion, found herself caught up in a high-profile court case” First of all, when she broke her contract after only 11 weeks, Ms Burki filed a court claim herself, then refused our offer during mediation, she refused a further two offers, so it was clear she wanted so badly to go to court. She also left her full name on Google review in 2015. 

On 17th September 2018 we had the court hearing regarding the costs. Tereza Burki’s solicitors claimed her legal costs were £220,000 for this case, and she was awarded around £8000. On 19thJuly 2018 while waiting for the judgment her solicitors wrote to us asking us to settle before the judgment and stated “Your client should also bear in mind that in the event that it is wholly successful (which we consider unlikely), our client is unlikely to be able to meet any damages or costs award” We wonder if Tereza Burki is now in position to meet her £212.000 solicitors fees. 

Tereza Burki was never shown a profile of “James” in December, and the guy whose profile we showed her, was by the time she paid the full fee at the end of January, dating and unavailable. We know whom she is talking about, but it would be professional if she was honest. 

Tereza Burki says: ‘I’m finding it hard right now. I no longer have dreams. I used to dream of meeting someone, of having a future, when I went to these people. Now, I don’t know what’s next,’ she says. The fact is as adults we make our own decisions. Ms. Burki’s dreams and happiness are not depended, nor connected to Seventy Thirty.  Her dreams and her future depend on Ms. Burki only. 

Tereza Burki explains how it came to her writing defamatory statements online: ‘That was after three glasses of wine one evening when I’d tried to get hold of the owner [founder Susie Ambrose] to find a solution, but had been told: “Nobody talks to her.” The truth is; Tereza Burki conducted a systematic online hate campaign lasting for over 12 months. She went as far as sending threatening text messages directly to Mr Lemarc Thomas in June 2016 saying “I shall make sure you guys are out of business pretty soon” and to Ms Ambrose threatening “you would find it hard to work in this city”. And then this October 2018 she yet again redrafted her online review. She has changed the online text three times in the space of 12 months, so it wasn’t only one tipsy evening. 

It is worth saying the following: the Judge found that she had been misled as to the number of active members on our database (which finding is under appeal) as we include expired members who are still single and headhunted individuals, but none of her other allegations were upheld by the Judge. You can check what the Judge found from the Judgment. 

Tereza Burki also forgot to mention how she said she did not read her Contract with us which is on 1 page only, and T & Cs which has 11 pages. The legal documents every member is given to read and sign, says in 6 places how we work and who is on our database. We even clearly state on our website, see page Members.  Tereza Burki signed the documents stating that she read and understood. 

In court, she only relied on her statement that she didn’t know and was apparently not told about expired paid members who were still single and available for matchmaking, and headhunted individuals. All of this is clearly explained in her Letter of Agreement and Terms and Conditions that she signed. Bizarrely a judge, a man of the law, the same people who made all companies in the UK have contracts and T & C, accepted her admission that “she didn’t read Seventy Thirty’s legal documents” 

Tereza Burki further explains: “Ms. Burki had a handful of brief flings before enlisting the services of Seventy Thirty, but few of them were satisfying, and none lasted.”

Ms. Burki is saying she had few flings before joining Seventy Thirty, but deliberately covered up being a member of Gray and Farrar (matchmaking agency) for the full year before joining Seventy Thirty. Admitting that, it would be obvious she was unsuccessful with yet another matchmaking agency.  

We would like to highlight one contradicting thing by Tereza Burki’s own admission in the court was a gentleman “Mr X” who she wanted to meet, and asked about him on few occasions, and who is extremely wealthy, and who she believed is headhunted, but in reality, he was our paid member. So it was ok to meet “Mr X” even though Ms Burki thought he was headhunted, but at the same time, she claimed in the court, she had no idea we headhunt.  

And that is why the judge said: “I have not found that Seventy Thirty lacked a sizeable database (when former members a headhunted individuals are taken into account), or was not an effective matchmaking agency, or did not in the event provide Ms. Burki with suitable matches. I have not, therefore, found that the business was a fundamentally dishonest or fraudulent operation."

Tereza Burki states: ‘The psychological profile takes an hour,’ she says. ‘You bare your soul to these people and tell them your dreams and aspirations.’

Ms. Burki confuses a profiling interview with psychological profiling. To clarify; psychological profiling was developed by the FBA and is mainly used to profile criminals. Seventy Thirty conducts profiling interview where a member has the opportunity to say as much and as little about themselves, and explain their criteria in a potential partner. Ms. Burki implies that Seventy Thirty made her “bare her soul” to us, when in fact as we work holistically, therefore, we leave to our members to say what they feel is appropriate to say. However, Ms. Burki told The Daily Mail and the British public 100% more intimate details of her life compared to what she told us. 

Tereza Burki appeared in Wandsworth court on 22 January 2018 to be a witness on the side of our ex-employee Emmet Colville whom we took legal action against for stealing contacts and passing it onto Tereza Burki. The Judge Hugman dismissed her statement stating in front of five wittneses that Tereza Burki is unreliable and not to be believed and called her “hot-headed”. We won the case, and our ex-employee was ordered to pay £25,000 and was given an injunction order.  

By her own admission in court, Tereza Burki apparently never read the terms and conditions and was therefore not clear about the fact that our database consists of current and past members and people who have been carefully curated and selected as potential matches through executive searches. Her expectations as a member were consequently lofty and unrealistic.  

Tereza Burki was found to have libelled Seventy Thirty, as the Judge said that we had sourced suitable matches for her. Therefore, her remarks about us being a non-reputable and fraudulent company were deemed untrue and entirely without foundation. In a day and age when so many people refer to search engines to research a new contact or product before they invest their time and money, baseless and intentionally damaging remarks on internet review forums can have a massively harmful effect on consumer confidence and the membership of a business.

Seventy Thirty has been in business since 2001 and its team of psychologists and matchmakers have developed a dating model with a great deal of success. To date, we’ve been responsible for matching over six thousand individuals who have, on the basis of an introduction facilitated by Seventy Thirty, gone on to have long-lasting relationships. Moreover, sixty-three children have been born as a result of our introductions. We are incredibly proud of the service we provide and our very many happy clients

Thank you

Seventy Thirty Ltd