Mister M 1,608 #1453 Posted May 12, 2021 52 minutes ago, West 77 said: I only pay my own debts, Mister Gee. I suspect it could very well be a publicity stunt. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-57087274 I haven't stuck up for him. I've just behaved rational as like everyone else here I don't know the facts. Why do you insist on calling me by another Forummer's username? Projection? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
the_bloke 17 #1454 Posted May 13, 2021 Turns out the debt is a claim by someone named Yvonne Hobbs who sounds like a Covid conspiracy loon who has also claimed debts against various other MPs as well as M&S and the Royal Mail. How it got to the CCJ stage is beyond me. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
RollingJ 1,999 #1455 Posted May 13, 2021 (edited) 31 minutes ago, the_bloke said: Turns out the debt is a claim by someone named Yvonne Hobbs who sounds like a Covid conspiracy loon who has also claimed debts against various other MPs as well as M&S and the Royal Mail. How it got to the CCJ stage is beyond me. I suspected it was summat like that, but others on here will no doubt maintain she has 'a valid claim' - somehow.🤪 Would be 'interesting' to see what the claim was in relation to, as well. Further edit: noticed the 'story' has 'disappeared' from the BBC front page, as well. 😀 Edited May 13, 2021 by RollingJ Added text. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
RollingJ 1,999 #1456 Posted May 13, 2021 AND they have gone VERY quiet. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Guest sibon #1457 Posted May 13, 2021 It’s interesting that we’ve a bunch of people who were sceptical yesterday, based upon “lack of evidence”. Those same people seem to be happy to accept a similar lack of evidence, in the opposite direction today, because it suits their agenda. Hypocrites? I think so. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
RollingJ 1,999 #1458 Posted May 13, 2021 2 minutes ago, sibon said: It’s interesting that we’ve a bunch of people who were sceptical yesterday, based upon “lack of evidence”. Those same people seem to be happy to accept a similar lack of evidence, in the opposite direction today, because it suits their agenda. Hypocrites? I think so. Just out of curiosity - have you seen the latest BBC news report on the matter? Seems like another loon was 'trying it on' and the online system failed to spot it wasn't a valid claim. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
alchresearch 214 #1459 Posted May 13, 2021 57 minutes ago, West 77 said: It's a shame more information about the alleged debt has been made public so soon because I was enjoying watching the anti Boris brigade making fools of themselves again. Angela Rayner really laid into him yesterday on Twitter about this. Mind you, most of her rants are clutching at straws at the best of times. Corbyn and Starmer might be doing a good job at keeping the Tories in power but she needs to be commended for her role too. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
RollingJ 1,999 #1460 Posted May 13, 2021 2 minutes ago, alchresearch said: Angela Rayner really laid into him yesterday on Twitter about this. Mind you, most of her rants are clutching at straws at the best of times. Corbyn and Starmer might be doing a good job at keeping the Tories in power but she needs to be commended for her role too. Quite! 🤣 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Guest sibon #1461 Posted May 13, 2021 35 minutes ago, RollingJ said: Just out of curiosity - have you seen the latest BBC news report on the matter? Seems like another loon was 'trying it on' and the online system failed to spot it wasn't a valid claim. The BBC report contains the same level of proof that the Private Eye report was based upon. It’s fascinating that you place great store by one, whilst dismissing the other out of hand. It is also concerning that letters must have been sent about this and he’s ignored them. Not a good look for the PM. 21 minutes ago, West 77 said: You would have thought after Boris being Prime Minister for around 22 months the opposition parties would have learnt that playing the man doesn't damage him or the Tory Party. Sir Keir Starmer is the worse offender. When we get to the politically tough bit of all of this, Johnson’s odious personality and attitude will count against him. So far, he’s got by pretending to be a Coco the Clown/Jeremy Corbyn hybrid. The bills are about to land and, as we’ve seen lately, he’s not very good at paying them. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
RollingJ 1,999 #1462 Posted May 13, 2021 22 minutes ago, sibon said: The BBC report contains the same level of proof that the Private Eye report was based upon. It’s fascinating that you place great store by one, whilst dismissing the other out of hand. It is also concerning that letters must have been sent about this and he’s ignored them. Not a good look for the PM. having not seen the 'Private Eye' - a satirical, therefore not necessarily objective publication - article,I can't comment on that, but the BBC report does mention that defamation cases are normally heard in the High Court, not via the 'on-line claims court' . Personally, I can't see how an on-line claim for defamation can reasonably succeed, but that is just my opinion - which I'm sure you will point out. As you (and others) seem to be in two minds about the BBC, I will agree - they do seem to have some funny ideas about what constitutes factual reporting. I too, am a little confused as to why the court documents which must have been sent to No.10 were not acted upon - that in itself merits some explanation - but you cannot get away from the fact that this was a case brought by a serial complainer, with a questionable mental state, via the wrong channels. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Guest sibon #1463 Posted May 13, 2021 2 hours ago, RollingJ said: I too, am a little confused as to why the court documents which must have been sent to No.10 were not acted upon - that in itself merits some explanation - but you cannot get away from the fact that this was a case brought by a serial complainer, with a questionable mental state, via the wrong channels. Why do you think that she has a “questionable mental state” Seems a bit judgemental from someone who was harping on about wanting concrete evidence yesterday. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
RollingJ 1,999 #1464 Posted May 13, 2021 (edited) 6 minutes ago, sibon said: Why do you think that she has a “questionable mental state” Seems a bit judgemental from someone who was harping on about wanting concrete evidence yesterday. Because - She is a 'Covid Vaccine Denier' and (according to the report I read on the BBC website earlier today) she has made these 'defamation' claims against others, too. Doesn't sound like a particularly stable individual, to me. OK - 'vaccine denier' might not prove her unstable, but if she has made previous spurious 'defamation' claims... Edited May 13, 2021 by RollingJ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...