Johnson Again (Just how skint is he?)

First reported by Ian Hislop, editor of Private Eye. I know who I believe, and it’s not the compulsive liar Bozo! Bring on the Sheriffs!
 
There is a serous issue to this tbf. In my job I have to go through full UK Government Security Clearance and that clearance could be refused or removed if I was in serious debt (can lead to someone being open to bribery by foreign and domestic naughty actors) so I could literally lose my job. I guard this clearance very carefully as I've held it for 15 years and it's my livlihood. So it does beg the question shouldn't all politicians who serve in Westminster and have access to much more secret things than me be held to an equal if not higher standard?

I'm a fan of Boris and voted for him in the leadership challenge but he needs to sort this out quick sharp and if its been done maliciously that should also be fully investigated especially if its politically motivated as that is also extremely disturbing
 
Ragnarok said:
There is a serous issue to this tbf. In my job I have to go through full UK Government Security Clearance and that clearance could be refused or removed if I was in serious debt (can lead to someone being open to bribery by foreign and domestic naughty actors) so I could literally lose my job. I guard this clearance very carefully as I've held it for 15 years and it's my livlihood. So it does beg the question shouldn't all politicians who serve in Westminster and have access to much more secret things than me be held to an equal if not higher standard?

I'm a fan of Boris and voted for him in the leadership challenge but he needs to sort this out quick sharp and if its been done maliciously that should also be fully investigated especially if its politically motivated as that is also extremely disturbing
Click to expand...
If someone who is a convicted sex offender can stand for parliament then the bar is much lower than I ever thought
 
Prank or conspiracy loon confirmed: https://order-order.com/2021/05/13/...brought-forward-by-covid-conspiracy-theorist/

it’s now emerged the claimant is actually a Covid conspiracy theorist called Yvonne Hobbs, who’s used the Online Civil Money Claims service to accuse the PM of “repeated defamation”. She has also previously made legal claims against Rishi Sunak, Marks and Spencer, and Royal Mail.

Clearly the claims are invalid, and No. 10 reckons they will be able to strike the defamation claim out given they’re not normally heard in a county court.
 
Lost Seasider said:
Prank or conspiracy loon confirmed: https://order-order.com/2021/05/13/...brought-forward-by-covid-conspiracy-theorist/

it’s now emerged the claimant is actually a Covid conspiracy theorist called Yvonne Hobbs, who’s used the Online Civil Money Claims service to accuse the PM of “repeated defamation”. She has also previously made legal claims against Rishi Sunak, Marks and Spencer, and Royal Mail.

Clearly the claims are invalid, and No. 10 reckons they will be able to strike the defamation claim out given they’re not normally heard in a county court.
Click to expand...
That's a shame, we've only got the other 415 things to take the piss out of him with now.
 
Lost Seasider said:
Prank or conspiracy loon confirmed: https://order-order.com/2021/05/13/...brought-forward-by-covid-conspiracy-theorist/

it’s now emerged the claimant is actually a Covid conspiracy theorist called Yvonne Hobbs, who’s used the Online Civil Money Claims service to accuse the PM of “repeated defamation”. She has also previously made legal claims against Rishi Sunak, Marks and Spencer, and Royal Mail.

Clearly the claims are invalid, and No. 10 reckons they will be able to strike the defamation claim out given they’re not normally heard in a county court.
Click to expand...
As Guido wisely asks, why were the letters from the claimant and the court ignored? It looks as if Rishi was able to deal with it. Why not Boris?
 
Mexboroseasider said:
As Guido wisely asks, why were the letters from the claimant and the court ignored? It looks as if Rishi was able to deal with it. Why not Boris?
Click to expand...

Do you think Boris opens the post at No 10? I would suggest that it is highly likely he never saw any paperwork connected to this case.

As to what went wrong, who knows? Probably a mistake by junior staff in the post room, it happens.
 
Lost Seasider said:
Do you think Boris opens the post at No 10? I would suggest that it is highly likely he never saw any paperwork connected to this case.

As to what went wrong, who knows? Probably a mistake by junior staff in the post room, it happens.
Click to expand...
Ah yes. Blame the servants.

And it just wouldn’t be one letter. There’d be loads. Plus court papers. I imagine it was all passed up the line until it finally landed on his desk, where it was dismissed with a wave of the hand and instructions not to bother him with such piffle.
 
Mexboroseasider said:
Ah yes. Blame the servants.
Click to expand...

Do you think Boris opens the letters?


Mexboroseasider said:
And it just wouldn’t be one letter. There’d be loads. Plus court papers.
Click to expand...

Are you sure? Perhaps someone with experience of the process could comment.


Mexboroseasider said:
I imagine it was all passed up the line until it finally landed on his desk, where it was dismissed with a wave of the hand and instructions not to bother him with such piffle.
Click to expand...

I think what you mean is that you want to imagine that's what happened because it suits your agenda.
 
Mexboroseasider said:
I do have experience of the process.
Click to expand...

Small cliams?

AFAIK the court sends a copy of the claim form to the defendant, who then has 14 days to acknowledge the claim, if he fails to do this then the claimant can apply for "judgement by default", which is what appears to have happened in this case.

So a single document misfiled by junior staff, as I said, it happens.
 
Lost Seasider said:
Small cliams?

AFAIK the court sends a copy of the claim form to the defendant, who then has 14 days to acknowledge the claim, if he fails to do this then the claimant can apply for "judgement by default", which is what appears to have happened in this case.

So a single document misfiled by junior staff, as I said, it happens.
Click to expand...
Plus the earlier correspondence (litigants in person with a grudge are notorious for it). Plus the letter before action. Plus a copy of the court order issued by the court after judgment was given. All misfiled.
 
Lost Seasider said:
Small cliams?

AFAIK the court sends a copy of the claim form to the defendant, who then has 14 days to acknowledge the claim, if he fails to do this then the claimant can apply for "judgement by default", which is what appears to have happened in this case.

So a single document misfiled by junior staff, as I said, it happens.
Click to expand...
You would probably have taken pride in defending Fred West!
 
Mexboroseasider said:
Plus the earlier correspondence (litigants in person with a grudge are notorious for it). Plus the letter before action. Plus a copy of the court order issued by the court after judgment was given. All misfiled.
Click to expand...

A rather large assumption that there was correspondence and a letter before action, I rather doubt either happened in this case.


EPM46 said:
You would probably have taken pride in defending Fred West!
Click to expand...

He hanged himself before trial.
 
Lost Seasider said:
A rather large assumption that there was correspondence and a letter before action, I rather doubt either happened in this case.
Click to expand...
And a rather large assumption that there wasn’t.

What about the court order? Are you assuming it was misfiled as well or that the court didn’t send it out?
 
Lost Seasider said:
And unsurprisingly the judgement has been struck out: https://order-order.com/2021/05/13/...ourt-debt-judgement-against-boris-struck-out/
Click to expand...
As Guido says it’s hardly unexpected (although rather fast I must say). How much did it cost? I only ask because I think the fee for a set aside application is c£255. Plus legal costs for his lawyers. For a debt of £535.

Hardly economic. But I suppose either the taxpayers or one of Boris’ mates in need of a favour will be picking up the tab.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top