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.
Hi All,
Sorry I know this has been done to death before but just trying to get it straight in my head.
Did Novacyt fire the first shot? Is this all just vindictiveness on part of the DHSC as we went after them first?
Is the first mention of any kind of dispute 09/04/2021?
"DHSC contract
On 29 September 2020, Novacyt announced a second supply contract with the DHSC for exsig® COVID-19 Direct kits and other products. In the full year trading update announced on 29 January 2021, Novacyt explained it was in active discussions with the DHSC regarding an extension of the supply contract. Unfortunately, an extension has not been agreed, although the Company supplied PROmate™ in Q1 2021 in accordance with DHSC demand. Regrettably, the parties are now in dispute regarding the contract, which may have a material impact on Q4 2020 revenues. However, the Company has taken legal advice and believes it has strong grounds to assert its contractual rights."
This was Nova's first response, by rns, to I believe Dhsc's decision not to pay for whatever the reason(s), which imo was a while after, as obviously Nova took legal advice on said communication?
So, Nova didnt start the situation - imo
Im sure others will have their opinion ???
DHSC entered into a contract with Novacyt for the purchase of instruments and tests, it was the height of the pandemic and the DHSC was under immense pressure to increase their capacity for testing. At the end of 2020/early 2021 the DHSC changed their mind, performed a u-turn, in my opinion, many parts of the NHS did not have the resources to accurately perform POC testing, therefore these tests and instruments had been stockpiled in certain areas. DHSC suggested that the tests were not fit for purpose and asked for their money back. Q1 Novacyt now supplied PROMATE, which was outside of the contract and was being used successfully within the NHS, unfortunately DHSC decided to withhold payment pending their requested refund, Novacyt offered to replace product under warranty as per the contract, the dispute was born!!
Vindictive is not a word that I would use.
Intrigued on two points re court case
1. 16 days allocated
2. Is it online only?
Courtesy of itsawrap yesterday
"Judge Time Venue Type Case number Case name
Mrs Justice O’Farrell 10.30am Remote hearing via MS Teams Case management conference HT-2022-000141 Secretary of State for Health and Social Care v Primer Design Ltd and another"
Can we watch that?
Interesting read
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King%27s_Bench_Division#Technology_and_Construction_Court
Anyone remember the Independent on Sunday articles suggesting likely problems with the DHSC contract?
It was all dismissed within 24 hours as a load of nonsense. He used to be a football journalist for goodness sake!
Very on this board could see beyond their own confirmation bias and board 'group think'.
Some thought it warranted more consideration but were shouted down by the likes of Porky and Saintsmith.
And here we are several years later.
Reference the Independent article, although Novacyt declined to comment, seem to recall that the DHSC did respond and effectively dismissed the claims within the Independent. Easy with hindsight, however at the time teething issues were to be expected within certain trusts, trust that had no previous experience with such equipment.
More detail pls on exactly why the fuss in the first place? Was it just an excuse to pull a contract like Boris did with valvena? I recall issues with s and spec. And promate ( a buffer after all) is this all it is?
Plus the agenda driven bad press eg private eye?
Now that there is a major investigation into the COVID fiddles that broke the health bank, just perhaps good publicity as the company has done nothing wrong except perhaps having once employed a dodgy dentist.
Ms team leader on these online meetings will notify with a code to all invitees. To enable your participation you must have this. I think all shareholders should be represented, nothing to stop you applying for an invite
Tks Bullraider
As for the microgen but alas I think we are being ran by a bunch of cowboys, I'll still be here come the Agm though.