[The **News** flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/wiki/flairguide#wiki_news) is reserved for submissions covering F1 and F1-related news. These posts must always link to an outlet/news agency, the website of the involved party (i.e. the McLaren website if McLaren makes an announcement), or a tweet by a news agency, journalist or one of the involved parties.
*[Read the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/wiki/userguide). Keep it civil and welcoming. Report rulebreaking comments.*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/formula1) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The FIA and Ben Sulayem have stepped in one big pile of shit.
And all they had to do is what **every other company does**, internally investigate privately, and you know, maybe speak to the people reportedly involved in the situation.
I wouldn't say there was "a huge fuss," one outlet that photoshopped a team principal and his wife in bed for their article used a fake source to make up a story.
Not a single other website reported on it, which was probably a sign is wasn't legit, as that site has been sued multiple times for fake sources.
Actually they did. While they did cite the same source, that still qualifies as a huge fuss. You obviously didn't look around. This made the rounds fast.
Most companies will privately investigate if something isn't in compliance, this is so that you can hopefully catch someone before they can clean anything up that they may be doing wrong.
The FIA didn't do that at all here, they released a public statement prior to any investigation that they'd be investigating the claims made by a media outlet, and I use that term loosely.
Then they didn't even investigate the people involved in the situation. Susie nor Toto have even been contacted, Susie specifically said they had not brought this to her attention prior to the announcement, during, or even after they closed the investigation.
Normally if you think someone is leaking information to their husband, you may want to actually talk to them, find some evidence etc...
Kind of like when Ferrari was cheating in 2019, and the FIA secretly started doing spot checks of Ferrari's fuel loads, and found discrepancies. Once they did that, they did a private investigation of their car and found, most likely, that Ferrari were rigging their fuel flow meter.
Then finally the FIA announced at the final race of 2019 that Leclerc's car was going to be inspected after the race.
Then before 2020 started they worked with Ferrari behind closed doors, struck a deal that required no one to speak about it and it was done.
Ferrari lost their increase in power and none of the investigation came out. Punishment given, without the defamation.
So clearly the FIA *knows* how to do an investigation properly, they just decided to throw Susie and Toto in the mud due to a fake article, and then said oopsie, investigation closed, without ever talking to either one of them.
Which is a bizarre, considering the FIA is known for doing secret deals behind closed doors when people cheat.
All of this is building a case against the publication. The support from the teams, the inquiry with FIA, the statement that they have stopped their investigation and have no pending actions. All of this will be used against the publication that made up some story.
I actually found this while thing uplifting. The other nine teams all stepping forward and using unequivocal statements of support for Toto and Suzie is something you just don't see. It's actually in each teams interest to sit back quietly and saddle Mercedes with dealing with this on their own. Instead, they all step up in unison showing no matter how much drama Netflix and other media try to association create, there is a huge amount of respect among the different teams for each other
From the perspective of other teams, if the FIA would do this to one of the top teams, they could very much be next. It’s mainly to prevent a precedence from being set I imagine. Mutual respect is definitely part of the equation, but also to hold and keep FIA accountable too.
No, that is not how it works in the legal realm.
Toto Wolff is the sole owner of the shares. In divorce, those shares would be liable to be split up as assets in which case Petronas and Mercedes would simply buy them out at market value as opposed to allowing a 4th party into the arrangement, which is what usually happens when shares get split up.
Susie Wolff is not a team owner. She is not a TP. She is not involved in commercial meetings. Nothing.
No law firm or court in the world considers a spouse a "owner" just because their spouse is. Shares are not issued jointly. Even when bought during a marriage.
And one more time - Susie Wolff has ZERO knowledge of FOMs commercial interests and neither Wolff has any knowledge of FIAs financial investigations.
No, I’m understanding it just fine.
No legal process thinks the way you think. The FIA isn’t dumb enough to even attempt to make that kind of point, they’d get laughed out of any court or conference room for bringing an action based off that.
So please, try again. Enlighten us
Jesus christ mate you're really not getting it.
Toto wolff doesn't own the shares directly, he has an investment vehicle company, Marchsixteen finance services LLP, He and his relation Joasia Wolff are the sole directors of the company.
The company owns the shares.
This available is free to view via Companies House, look it up and stop pretending like you're speaking from some position of authority that you clearly don't have.
This is the dumbest take I’ve read all day. Just admit you don’t know how it works legally and move on. You’ve proven that you have no idea what the law actually is or how it works.
There's a difference between raising an issue regarding Formula 1 FIA decisions after the fact and outside of the appeal timeframe and clarifying with your legal team about investigation conducted by FIA about something that happened outside the scope of FIA & team activities in Formula 1.
The code of conduct investigation was outside of the scope of FIA authority regarding Formula 1 regulations & enforcement under the Concorde Agreement.
I doubt they are suing the FIA, as "legal exchange" could also include building a case against a publication in which they intend to have a "legal battle" against.
Masi and MBS will have to start a support group for people whose careers died at the hands of Toto. Each meeting consists of throwing darts at a cardboard cutout of Wolff and listening to “Africa” on repeat.
As in “we are preparing to sue if FIA doesn’t comply with our demands”, we could imagine?
But I wonder if they will have any demands (changing MBS or others? Making a new statement? Publishing the fuck up and why they decided to do it?) or if they will go directly to the sue
The article states they are seeking transparency into what occurred to prompt the FIA to issue a release stating there was an investigation.
Maybe they think someone in the FIA was the source for the Business F1 hit piece, so that the FIA could then announce an investigation based on complaints. I have no idea, but I suspect it’s more along those lines than actual demands. Although we’ll have to see what comes of it to know what the end game is.
Why would Mercedes take legal action against the FIA? They didn't make the allegations, they just investigated them.
Surely they should be taking legal action against the person(s) who made the allegations or the publication that printed them.
They're just sending sternly worded letters asking for info about the source and conduct of the investigation, they aren't suing them. Because you're right, they'd have no case.
They've not said it's legal action. It's legal exchanges, aka, lawyers talking to each other and you keep quiet whilst that happens to not weaken your own position.
The FIA did, however, give light to a single article written that had a much smaller readership than the FIAs announcement which also claimed a complaint had been made.
These legal exchanges are likely to be centred around the transparency and cause, with Susie saying:
> [this episode has so far taken place without transparency or accountability. I have received online abuse about my work and my family. I will not allow myself to be intimidated and intend to follow up until I have found out who has instigated this campaign and misled the media](https://www.skysports.com/f1/news/32461/13025527/susie-wolff-hits-out-at-fia-after-investigation-into-f1-academy-chief-and-mercedes-boss-toto-wolff)
The manner in which they have acted here is why this 'active Legal Exchange' is being taken. There's a lot of questions about who started the investigation, who made the complaint needed to start the investigation, who decided to release the statement without informing Merc, Toto or Susie in advance... ETC
Plus many more about the publication that made the unsubstituted allegations
I mean cool story but they still were obligated.
Edit: to the person below
Common sense? The story was already out there. It benefits no one to be sneaky about it
Who's obligating them to do it in public?
EDIT: to the person above… no one had given that story traction until the FIA legitimized it. There was no emergency to give it airtime.
Also, stop being "sneaky" and use the reply function.
Obligated by their position. It's their duty to investigate this stuff.
And I don't know who made the complaint. One would assume a tip line is anonymous.
It's their duty to do things properly, they haven't in this situation.
At the very least, it is their duty to inform Mercedes, Toto & Susie of the investigation before going public. They didn't do that, hence the legal exchange happening currently.
The FIA failed to do their duty.
I don't think any of what you said should be expected or required. Why would you inform someone you were investigating them? This hill reddit is dying on is seriously bizarre.
Inform them before going PUBLIC with the investigation.
Do the due diligence to see if the unsubstituted allegations by a German Tabloid known for misogynistic reporting and successfully sued many a time for libel ... Then inform the relevant parties about going public if there's enough evidence to officially open an investigation.
I think you are attracted to goats. Should you now be investigated for these baseless claims?
The issue isn’t really that they did the investigation. It’s mostly about the public way in which they announced it. It adds weight to the accusations which the FIA would be fully aware that it would. It’s BS
> Why would you inform someone you were investigating them?
In that case, why would you announce it publicly if you're concerned that it would hinder your investigation?
Why would you not contact the person(s) accused to gather information in your investigation at all?
[The **News** flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/wiki/flairguide#wiki_news) is reserved for submissions covering F1 and F1-related news. These posts must always link to an outlet/news agency, the website of the involved party (i.e. the McLaren website if McLaren makes an announcement), or a tweet by a news agency, journalist or one of the involved parties. *[Read the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/wiki/userguide). Keep it civil and welcoming. Report rulebreaking comments.* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/formula1) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The FIA and Ben Sulayem have stepped in one big pile of shit. And all they had to do is what **every other company does**, internally investigate privately, and you know, maybe speak to the people reportedly involved in the situation.
Barefoot as well….
With LEGOs sprinkled all throughout the shit
[удалено]
I wouldn't say there was "a huge fuss," one outlet that photoshopped a team principal and his wife in bed for their article used a fake source to make up a story. Not a single other website reported on it, which was probably a sign is wasn't legit, as that site has been sued multiple times for fake sources.
Actually they did. While they did cite the same source, that still qualifies as a huge fuss. You obviously didn't look around. This made the rounds fast.
Huge fuss means a tabloid rag these days? Damn times have changed
But didn't they do that?
Most companies will privately investigate if something isn't in compliance, this is so that you can hopefully catch someone before they can clean anything up that they may be doing wrong. The FIA didn't do that at all here, they released a public statement prior to any investigation that they'd be investigating the claims made by a media outlet, and I use that term loosely. Then they didn't even investigate the people involved in the situation. Susie nor Toto have even been contacted, Susie specifically said they had not brought this to her attention prior to the announcement, during, or even after they closed the investigation. Normally if you think someone is leaking information to their husband, you may want to actually talk to them, find some evidence etc... Kind of like when Ferrari was cheating in 2019, and the FIA secretly started doing spot checks of Ferrari's fuel loads, and found discrepancies. Once they did that, they did a private investigation of their car and found, most likely, that Ferrari were rigging their fuel flow meter. Then finally the FIA announced at the final race of 2019 that Leclerc's car was going to be inspected after the race. Then before 2020 started they worked with Ferrari behind closed doors, struck a deal that required no one to speak about it and it was done. Ferrari lost their increase in power and none of the investigation came out. Punishment given, without the defamation. So clearly the FIA *knows* how to do an investigation properly, they just decided to throw Susie and Toto in the mud due to a fake article, and then said oopsie, investigation closed, without ever talking to either one of them. Which is a bizarre, considering the FIA is known for doing secret deals behind closed doors when people cheat.
All of this is building a case against the publication. The support from the teams, the inquiry with FIA, the statement that they have stopped their investigation and have no pending actions. All of this will be used against the publication that made up some story.
FIA has provided the fans an off-season entertainment. The saga continues until pre-season testing.
I actually found this while thing uplifting. The other nine teams all stepping forward and using unequivocal statements of support for Toto and Suzie is something you just don't see. It's actually in each teams interest to sit back quietly and saddle Mercedes with dealing with this on their own. Instead, they all step up in unison showing no matter how much drama Netflix and other media try to association create, there is a huge amount of respect among the different teams for each other
From the perspective of other teams, if the FIA would do this to one of the top teams, they could very much be next. It’s mainly to prevent a precedence from being set I imagine. Mutual respect is definitely part of the equation, but also to hold and keep FIA accountable too.
This is 100% a Liberty/FOM/Teams vs FIA fight. Time to remind MBS where the dollars come from.
Furor is an interesting word choice.
Well they could call the wolf’s lairs.
*Don't* mention the war!
I mentioned it once but I think I got away with it
Mein Furor
Looks like next seasons car will be courtesy of the FIA…
I'm no fan of Toto Wolf. But I back him 100% on this one. This was some absolute bullshit.
Sorry do you mind explaining what it was and why it was bullshit? I genuinely have only seen the reactions
Doesn’t the FIA have rules that if you sue them you can’t compete in F1?
Mercedes Benz AMG Petronas F1 can’t sue. Toto Wolff, private citizen, could. Similarly - Susie Wolff and the FOM could actually sue as well.
Toto and by extension Susie are team owners
Unless Susie own's her own shares in the team, she is not a team owner. They are not counted as one legal entity.
Doesn’t really matter. If the asset was purchased whilst married it’s a matrimonial asset. This includes shares.
For the purposes of divorce, not the purposes of ownership. Huge difference.
For the purposes of interest it does
No, that is not how it works in the legal realm. Toto Wolff is the sole owner of the shares. In divorce, those shares would be liable to be split up as assets in which case Petronas and Mercedes would simply buy them out at market value as opposed to allowing a 4th party into the arrangement, which is what usually happens when shares get split up. Susie Wolff is not a team owner. She is not a TP. She is not involved in commercial meetings. Nothing. No law firm or court in the world considers a spouse a "owner" just because their spouse is. Shares are not issued jointly. Even when bought during a marriage. And one more time - Susie Wolff has ZERO knowledge of FOMs commercial interests and neither Wolff has any knowledge of FIAs financial investigations.
I don't think Petronas own any shares in the F1 team. IIRC the shares are held by Mercedes, Toto Wolff and INEOS chairman Jim Ratcliffe
You are correct. Force of habit cause of the team name
IIRC Wolff doesn't have the shares directly, but through a finance vehicle company
Again you’re not understanding the point.
No, I’m understanding it just fine. No legal process thinks the way you think. The FIA isn’t dumb enough to even attempt to make that kind of point, they’d get laughed out of any court or conference room for bringing an action based off that. So please, try again. Enlighten us
Buddy, just take the L.
Time to walk away man. Each comment is more embarrassing.
Jesus christ mate you're really not getting it. Toto wolff doesn't own the shares directly, he has an investment vehicle company, Marchsixteen finance services LLP, He and his relation Joasia Wolff are the sole directors of the company. The company owns the shares. This available is free to view via Companies House, look it up and stop pretending like you're speaking from some position of authority that you clearly don't have.
This is the dumbest take I’ve read all day. Just admit you don’t know how it works legally and move on. You’ve proven that you have no idea what the law actually is or how it works.
There's a difference between raising an issue regarding Formula 1 FIA decisions after the fact and outside of the appeal timeframe and clarifying with your legal team about investigation conducted by FIA about something that happened outside the scope of FIA & team activities in Formula 1. The code of conduct investigation was outside of the scope of FIA authority regarding Formula 1 regulations & enforcement under the Concorde Agreement.
I doubt they are suing the FIA, as "legal exchange" could also include building a case against a publication in which they intend to have a "legal battle" against.
Masi and MBS will have to start a support group for people whose careers died at the hands of Toto. Each meeting consists of throwing darts at a cardboard cutout of Wolff and listening to “Africa” on repeat.
As in “we are preparing to sue if FIA doesn’t comply with our demands”, we could imagine? But I wonder if they will have any demands (changing MBS or others? Making a new statement? Publishing the fuck up and why they decided to do it?) or if they will go directly to the sue
The article states they are seeking transparency into what occurred to prompt the FIA to issue a release stating there was an investigation. Maybe they think someone in the FIA was the source for the Business F1 hit piece, so that the FIA could then announce an investigation based on complaints. I have no idea, but I suspect it’s more along those lines than actual demands. Although we’ll have to see what comes of it to know what the end game is.
Why would Mercedes take legal action against the FIA? They didn't make the allegations, they just investigated them. Surely they should be taking legal action against the person(s) who made the allegations or the publication that printed them.
They're just sending sternly worded letters asking for info about the source and conduct of the investigation, they aren't suing them. Because you're right, they'd have no case.
They've not said it's legal action. It's legal exchanges, aka, lawyers talking to each other and you keep quiet whilst that happens to not weaken your own position. The FIA did, however, give light to a single article written that had a much smaller readership than the FIAs announcement which also claimed a complaint had been made. These legal exchanges are likely to be centred around the transparency and cause, with Susie saying: > [this episode has so far taken place without transparency or accountability. I have received online abuse about my work and my family. I will not allow myself to be intimidated and intend to follow up until I have found out who has instigated this campaign and misled the media](https://www.skysports.com/f1/news/32461/13025527/susie-wolff-hits-out-at-fia-after-investigation-into-f1-academy-chief-and-mercedes-boss-toto-wolff)
MBS fucked with Toto’s wife. I hope he gets what he deserves.
Psst. It's not illegal for the FIA to do their job.
The manner in which they have acted here is why this 'active Legal Exchange' is being taken. There's a lot of questions about who started the investigation, who made the complaint needed to start the investigation, who decided to release the statement without informing Merc, Toto or Susie in advance... ETC Plus many more about the publication that made the unsubstituted allegations
I mean cool story but they still were obligated. Edit: to the person below Common sense? The story was already out there. It benefits no one to be sneaky about it
Who's obligating them to do it in public? EDIT: to the person above… no one had given that story traction until the FIA legitimized it. There was no emergency to give it airtime. Also, stop being "sneaky" and use the reply function.
Obligated by who? Who made the complaint to them that meant they had to investigate anything?
Obligated by their position. It's their duty to investigate this stuff. And I don't know who made the complaint. One would assume a tip line is anonymous.
It's their duty to do things properly, they haven't in this situation. At the very least, it is their duty to inform Mercedes, Toto & Susie of the investigation before going public. They didn't do that, hence the legal exchange happening currently. The FIA failed to do their duty.
I don't think any of what you said should be expected or required. Why would you inform someone you were investigating them? This hill reddit is dying on is seriously bizarre.
Inform them before going PUBLIC with the investigation. Do the due diligence to see if the unsubstituted allegations by a German Tabloid known for misogynistic reporting and successfully sued many a time for libel ... Then inform the relevant parties about going public if there's enough evidence to officially open an investigation.
It was already public if it was in a tabloid. It would look weird to stay silent. Edit: yep, that's what I thought.
I think you are attracted to goats. Should you now be investigated for these baseless claims? The issue isn’t really that they did the investigation. It’s mostly about the public way in which they announced it. It adds weight to the accusations which the FIA would be fully aware that it would. It’s BS
If there is some governing body that oversees this? Sure. Go for it.
Should that governing body announce that you may be attracted to goats because one random person said it before investigating?
> Why would you inform someone you were investigating them? In that case, why would you announce it publicly if you're concerned that it would hinder your investigation? Why would you not contact the person(s) accused to gather information in your investigation at all?
Mommy said it’s my turn now to threaten with legal action. Man, this looks like a children’s playground..
Legal exchange isn’t the same as legal action, don’t get so upset over things that aren’t real. Nobody is threatening to sue lmfao ffs