The Conservative Party - Part Two.

[Guest sibon]

6 minutes ago, West 77 said:

Okay despite the fact it's now obvious that the alleged debt is not a real personal debt you continue to besmirch our democratically elected Prime Minister rather than acknowledge your own bias view on the matter is wrong.

 

Just for completeness 10 Downing Street is a working address and staff will deal with any correspondence sent there.  Common sense tells me they must get overwhelmed with deliveries from the postman much of it what normal people would class as junk mail.  I'm guessing some of this junk mail is in the form of fake invoices or other false demands for money.

Are you saying that the staff at Downing Street are incompetent?

 

There’s quite a few of us that have pointed that out to you repeatedly.

 

Johnson is way past besmirching by the way. He’s got plenty of history on the wrong side of the courts.

[Cyclecar 24]

Nowhere does it mention if Boris (or whoever) has settled the monies owed to the petitioner. 

 

For anyone who has had an unsolicited and unwelcome letter from Northampton County Court, the likelyhood of you getting half the silks in London to turn up in the high court to have the action struck off sucks.

 

The court  letter would have been  treated as some pettyfogging nusiance from the 'little people', etc.  File 13. 

 

That's life. 

[RollingJ 2,035]

4 minutes ago, Cyclecar said:

Nowhere does it mention if Boris (or whoever) has settled the monies owed to the petitioner. 

 

For anyone who has had an unsolicited and unwelcome letter from Northampton County Court, the likelyhood of you getting half the silks in London to turn up in the high court to have the action struck off sucks.

 

The court  letter would have been  treated as some pettyfogging nusiance from the 'little people', etc.  File 13. 

 

That's life. 

From what I have read, this was what is known as a 'vexatious petition' and shouldn't even have got as far as a hearing - which it probably didn't - just someone pushing computer keys without even checking what it was all about.

 

I don't believe it was a valid claim - as has been said, defamation cases should be held in the High Court, not via the online system.

[Guest sibon]

4 hours ago, RollingJ said:

From what I have read, this was what is known as a 'vexatious petition' and shouldn't even have got as far as a hearing - which it probably didn't - just someone pushing computer keys without even checking what it was all about.

 

I don't believe it was a valid claim - as has been said, defamation cases should be held in the High Court, not via the online system.

Maybe not, but you should try to get justice served within 24 hours. It is truly remarkable that the CCJ has been set aside so quickly.

 

Again, more string pulling and favouritism. In the end, this will all come home to roost.

Edited May 13, 2021 by sibon

[RollingJ 2,035]

Definitely not, and like everything else in life, the higher up you are, the easier it is to get things done - a fact of life which everyone, not just the PM, exploits - human nature.

[Guest sibon]

Would you like a little Brylcreem for that forelock?

[RollingJ 2,035]

Just now, sibon said:

Would you like a little Brylcreem for that forelock?

Yucky stuff, but if you want to use it...

[ECCOnoob 1,041]

9 hours ago, sibon said:

Maybe not, but you should try to get justice served within 24 hours. It is truly remarkable that the CCJ has been set aside so quickly.

 

Again, more string pulling and favouritism. In the end, this will all come home to roost.

It's a simple routine application in response to a clear unmeritorious and completely incorrect online money claim.  The more I read into it the more it also appears that the claim was submitted through the wrong protocol and any automated process leading to the default CCJ was completely erroneous. 

 

I'm not surprised at all it's been turn around. Lawyers receive rulings all the time like that. Add on the fact we are talking about the Prime Minister's Office here, with their own bank of  Lawyers ready on tap just what exactly did you expect?

 

How do you even know it's been 24-hours? Just because it gets reference in private eye and then subsequently blow up all over the papers doesn't mean the time frame is accurate. This may have been quietly dealt with in the background for days.

 

I'd ease off the tin foil hats a bit if I was you.

 

Quite frankly, this claimant is pretty unambitious. If there really was some alleged defamation case which was so severe it triggered them to pursue legal action - a total value of £500 or so damages is a bit pathetic as a settlement.   She probably get a lot more tipping off the newspapers and selling her story.........oh wait 

 

Chancer is my suspicion.  

Edited May 14, 2021 by ECCOnoob

[RollingJ 2,035]

Exactly, @ECCOnoob- but there are some you will never convince 😉

[El Cid 219]

What does Boris Johnson ACTUALLY STAND FOR?

 

Before Brexit it was reported that he wrote two articles for the Telegraph, one was pro-EU and one was anti-EU.

He does not stand for anything except himself.

[Arnold_Lane 0]

14 minutes ago, West 77 said:

It's not really a surprise that someone working as a journalists  should write to different viewpoints about an important issue.  The important thing is he chose the right article to support  which  is what the democratic people of the UK also wanted.

Wasn't he working as a mayor or MP at the same time?

[Arnold_Lane 0]

2 minutes ago, West 77 said:

He won two Mayor elections for London which was a remarkable achievement  because most people living in London support Labour.  I think he might have given up being  Mayor when he wrote the two articles.   Nobody can accuse Boris of being workshy with the exception of George Osbourne  who had about 9 jobs at one time.

So was he an MP at the time?