He was more fun when he had been on the sauce. With a bit of luck he'll have a few tonight and get "hacked" again.

We're gonna need bigger nails

Your getting a 'like' for that one!

You should all be ashamed of ganging up against Gutterfax, sorry LeagueDweeb, in this way; it does seem he has more useful insight into the subject of this thread than most.

er... forgive me leaguedweeb, but where has the statutory demand come into things at this point? If I understand correctly, this should be litigation for breach of contract, for which damages would be awarded if the judge finds for OK, which if not paid and only then could result in enforcement of those damages. The way you put it, seems like the cart before the horses.

But don't ask me to provide the evidence of which way the horses are facing.

Stat demands only work if there is no dispute about the debt. If disputed then litigation it has to be.

Don't confuse league dweeb with big wordsicon_wink.gif

I know better than anyone what happened at OK Bulls. I dealt on several occasions with the parties involved.

I was merely tracing back to how the non existent litigation started. And there is no litigation. Only in your head.

6 months on from the process starting, nothing has happened and you can't give any supporting details. Apart from fake case numbers that don't actually exist anywhere but your imagination.

The stat demand was something Whitcut claimed had been issued as far back as 6 months ago. Even if the debt had been disputed, it wouldn't be taking this long for the case to go before a court.

You must remember that this legal case exists only in FA's head.

TBH I find this hounding of leaguedweeb to be pretty damn distasteful all told. The siege mentality does us absolutely no favours whatsoever. Why is it that whenever somebody has a view, or an opinion, that is against the club then people try to stop that view from being heard? From what I can see here there is no-evidence being put forward from either side, just argument and counter argument and an inability to answer pertinent questions from BOTH sides.

FFS I am pretty sure that this is a discussion board then why is it that when any (potentially interesting) discussion is in progress that there seems to be a need to ridicule anyone who does not speak in favour of the club?

Too many people on here struggle to see that other people have opinions that, whilst they may not like, does not neccessarily make them false.

Liar!

Show me the proof of this.

What was the name of the court usher? Who was his solicitor's clerk? What was the name of the chap [no sexism there -heh heh] who came round with the tea trolley? Why were there no eclairs to go with the tea? NO ANSWERS = You are a lying know nothing.

If you do give me all that information, I'll still post again tomorrow and ask for all of it again.