Listen to our latest Investing Matters Podcast episode 'Uncovering opportunities with investment trusts' with The AIC's Richard Stone here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
Surely you would only highlight on your profile cases you were successful at or have a good chance of winning?? Just a thought.
He sounds pretty switched on V , against a backdrop of the training that Novacyt did onsite before releasing products to each hospital for use. Fingers and toes crossed it all goes our way. I guess Mr A. Trigger KC will have to liase with Graham and ?
As he and others would have been the individuals at that time jumping through whatever hoops to fulfill the government's demands. Let's hope they haven't 'lost ' their phones and have retained whattsapp messages etc. It does appear that unfortunately our govt have been far from transparent in a lot of the contracts that have come under the spotlight thus far.
Took a look at the 1979 act and plethora of amendments and gave up , impossible to even narrow down what area tye govt could be focusing on.
I got official confirmation that mr Twigger does indeed represent the defendant, Primer Design. Hopefully a safe pair of hands!!
The Government signed up to a multi million pound contract with Novacyt and then renaged on the deal because they went and bought a load of cheap LFT's from China. In order to get out of the deal they made up some BS excuse. This government is corrupt and incompetent and Nova will win this.
Hold for gold or buy more at these cheap prices.
https://mhmembers.com/good-communications-drive-valuations-some-thoughts-for-improving-sentiment/
It's about Avacta but lots of points relevant here too.
Whilst being aware this is not a large contract , things like this could have most definitely been used to at least keep shareholders informed that they were still bidding for contracts. I haven't bothered researching if the US govt have gone down a similar route for other overseas troops, too much to do this week .
Thanks Larry.
Found this yesterday but the couple I've sent a DM to can't open it only govt tribe.
I can open it each time by typing into Google
W9114F22Q0002 and then scroll down until you reach imlive.S3.amazonaws
It is a 67 page doc. On page 5 it lists all the primerdesign tests that can be ordered on behalf of the American govt , to be shipped to a lab in Germany.
Tests for the US troops based there. The contract runs up until 2027.
It won't let me post a link.
Good luck lols. Perhaps if somebody more technically competent then me is about they can post the relevant pages.
This is interesting read . Wish I knew about this before investing . I suspect Novacyt is number 10 on the list of guidelines in below link
https://groww.in/blog/how-to-identify-value-traps-in-stock-investing
* here
There is enough evidence now to demonstrate that this government is not fit for purpose and matters relating to the DHSC dispute would be thrown out of the court and clear victory for Novacyt . He comes £10+ / share
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65077273
Frustrating though it is Pebbles , no case ever went to court because supplier and purchaser both happy with the arrangement and pointing out you treated them differently won't assist . The government were very careful about what they claimed the Innova test was to be used for.
Our case will be based entirely on the contract we signed and if we fulfilled our obligations according to that contract .
https://twitter.com/deeksj/status/1345368518011838469?t=oD-anCX6ncs4r7HJ0zJiUw&s=19
Thanks Larry
My argument would be to ask the question why did the government give innova a £3biillion contract when the U.S. Gov advised the lft tests were not approved or fit for purpose and should be thrown in the bin yet their contract was extended after NYCT and other UK companies had payments withheld and now having to go o court? Absolute corruption!!!!!
BH, have a look at third pic : https://twitter.com/Larry64450205/status/1565251934122115072?t=RcKECqvlb6VE6VNz78mehQ&s=19
The defendents (ncyt) are represented by Andrew Twigger etc
Dazzer, Thinking this guy is KC for the HMG.
". There are also issues turning on the meaning and effect of provisions in the Sale of Goods Act 1979."
Sale of Goods Act isn't referred to in the contract to my knowledge, some one is introducing that argument and I doubt it's NCYT.
Let’s run down the share value , and profit , well let’s see
Hi Larry , hold your hat we are moving north my friend
B H , Monday
HI Poidster, my thoughts exactly !
Hi Poidster, totaly agree as very often.
"So the test supplied was FIT FOR PURPOSE and approved by the NHS." ... And plenty of others : ctda, private labs, several NHSs, etc.
Fyi, fwiw, one Can find warranty on page 17 :
https://atamis-1928.cloudforce.com/sfc/p/#0O000000rwim/a/4J000000kEFW/0a.XEpAnsXhWLPDFwBk_JAjjG7TOqEVnG58sfxOiFmw
In this part : "Supplier’s maximum liability with any Authority claim under this warranty shall be to replace the faulty Goods free of charge or refund to the Authority the full costs for such faulty Goods paid by the Authority to the Supplier if replacement is not possible. "
IF they were deemed faulty, what i dont think, replacement IS possible with PROmate. They even bought for several millions of it... So yeah wtf is dhsc playing at...
"Strong contractual rights" BoD told us.
Re sales of goods act, havent found the courage to go into it lol
@poidster, whats your @ on twitter ?
Thanks for posting Poidster. Is this bit new or is it just rearranged words "The dispute concerns the meaning and effect of a “limited warranty” in the agreement and whether the rejection of certain of the test kits was valid. There are also issues turning on the meaning and effect of provisions in the Sale of Goods Act 1979." if it's new do you have an opinion.
I'm wondering if the wording for the limited warranty and the provisions in the SoG Act are a standard text/format in pharma contracts or individual in each contract.
Dazzer good find, thanks for posting