Priti Patel the new Home Sec wants to hang crims, lots of them.

[Themanwho]

We will never know that, they won’t want the embarrassment of a figure being known. It’s probably from a hush money fund that they write off to protect wrong doers.

You really are an ocean-going conspiraloon, aren't you? "Hush money fund" FFS; only in your febrile imagination.

Put more tinfoil on your shopping list, you're sure to need it, and remember to watch out for black helicopters... they are watching.

 

[mush_dad]

“the substantial amount”

Who said that?

 

[Helm]

So you have absolutely no idea whether it's 1p or £1M, but since it's coming from secret fund it doesn't matter.

You do seem to blessed with the third eye, can you let me have tomorrow nights Euromillions numbers.

BTW. You are mistaken in refering to Sir Phillip as a 'wrong doer', it was reported that they settled out of Tribunal. No blame or guilt can be attributed to him at all

There was a headline, that should be good enough for you!

 

[adouglasmhor]

Oh dear headlines again
"The government does not accept liability in this matter and it was right that the government defended the case," a spokesperson said.
Odd that a man with such high principles, so clearly in the right, turns down his day in court and an opportunity to bring it all into the light for filthy lucre.

Is it not the case if you proceed to court after an offer is made, and the settlement is equal to or lower than the offer was, you are liable for costs? I would take the advice of my lawyer in that situation, pragmatism before principles if it risked losing everything for no point.

 

[Helm]

Is it not the case if you proceed to court after an offer is made, and the settlement is equal to or lower than the offer was, you are liable for costs? I would take the advice of my lawyer in that situation, pragmatism before principles if it risked losing everything for no point.

I don't know to be honest, but if your lawyer advises taking the money, then clearly your case may not be as water tight as you thought.

 

[wetsmonkey]

You really are an ocean-going conspiraloon, aren't you? "Hush money fund" FFS; only in your febrile imagination.

Put more tinfoil on your shopping list, you're sure to need it, and remember to watch out for black helicopters... they are watching.

On second thoughts it probably comes from the police officer fund, a few less on the street to spare her blushes.

 

[wetsmonkey]

Who said that?

Do some research.

 

[LEGZ30]

A lot of the time when the Government or a Government Department is being sued it is cheaper to settle it out of court than pay the lawyers to fight it.

 

[wetsmonkey]

I don't know to be honest, but if your lawyer advises taking the money, then clearly your case may not be as water tight as you thought.

And if you give in and payout “a substantial amount”, without going to court, you must realise that you are in the wrong and you don’t want your dirty laundry aired in public.

 

[LEGZ30]

And if you give in and payout “a substantial amount”, without going to court, you must realise that you are in the wrong and you don’t want your dirty laundry aired in public.

Or the amount paid out is cheaper than paying the lawyers to fight it would have been.

 

[wetsmonkey]

A lot of the time when the Government or a Government Department is being sued it is cheaper to settle it out of court than pay the lawyers to fight it.

The Government say that they have defended this case, so they have already payed out for legal fees.

If they thought they could win, they wouldn’t pay out “a substantial amount”.

 

[Helm]

And if you give in and payout “a substantial amount”, without going to court, you must realise that you are in the wrong and you don’t want your dirty laundry aired in public.

Wrong again. It's common practice, but you knew that.

 

[wetsmonkey]

Or the amount paid out is cheaper than paying the lawyers to fight it would have been.

So everyone has now been given a green light to sue The Government and they will just out, sounds like a responsible use of our money.

 

[wetsmonkey]

Wrong again. It's common practice, but you knew that.

When you are in the wrong and you want it all minimised and wrapped up in a NDA.

 

[Helm]

When you are in the wrong and you want it all minimised and wrapped up in a NDA.

Wrong again.

 

[Northern_Biff]

Tory..................LMFAO.

 

[mush_dad]

Do some research.

TL.DR

 

[adouglasmhor]

I don't know to be honest, but if your lawyer advises taking the money, then clearly your case may not be as water tight as you thought.

Again depends on what they offer you to f off and suck it up.

 

[Helm]

Again depends on what they offer you to f off and suck it up.

Agreed, that and how principled you are, as well as how confident your lawyer is. A lot of variables involved on all sides.

 

[wetsmonkey]

The total secrecy with which Patel’s case has been dealt with is in complete contradiction to that which Sturgeon’s case is currently being given.

Interesting.