Member Info for BIGBangs

A company has a duty of care to its stakeholders predominant of which are its shareholders, they were over excited with their tweeting because they believed that things were just about to happen, I may have been over excited myself but this is not a breach of their duty.

No, if I were I would certainly not be offering my thoughts for free on a chat board. I have been CEO of two fully quoted companies and have a lifetime experience. If you are not content with my mushing you should of course seek legal advice, you will get no further but it may be the only thing that might satisfy you. This is the market I have seen much, much worse things happen and only ever limited if any redress. Sorry.

Nope, I suppose if they believed themselves to be sinking but actively covered that up you might have a chance of at least reaching the starting blocks but I doubt it. I know I am not giving you the answers for which, in your pain, you are frantically searching for but in my opinion the best thing to do is hold hard and hope that this is just a bump in the road and given time and the right approvals landing we will get back to where we were supposed to be. ATB

Computer, once they sort a legal opinion they were bound to follow it or put themselves in jeopardy. They are weak and inexperienced controlled by nominated advisor who has virtually total control over what is released in a RNS who would have insisted that they had to report the legal advice - quite right the error was not in reporting it but seeking it in the first place or certainly when they did.. We seem to agree that the DHSC had no need to cancel the contract and I certainly don’t believe they have.

Calderkate there is zero evidence to suggest negligence and you would be unable to prove it although as I have now suggested many times they have not acted with criminal intent, nor with negligence they are just out of their depth and do not have strong leadership or guidance within the company or it’s advisers although it is available to them should they seek it out - Lansdown would be a very good start.

Appreciate the positive vibe Klein - I am coming round.

I can’t explain it to even my satisfaction from this viewpoint but tweets are not legally binding, they believed it was true at the time. Things changed.

No.

No forget any sort of legal attack which you could almost certainly not afford and would certainly loose. This is just basic incompetence to a large degree and not criminal. You do yourself no favours by hanging onto the thought that ODX BoD have conspired to defraud you, they are not clever enough.

Thanks Computer for the actual extract from the contract. CK did mention the April date although did not comment on why they (ODX) had waited so long to pick this up or why they sought legal advise about this now 7 months later. My own view after giving myself time to calm down is nothing has actually changed. The DHSC have not terminated the contract they have simply overlooked the need to exercise an option to extend. When put on the spot they could do no more than say we don’t know what the future plans are for the contract - we have accepted that it was always a back up but after the time and trouble they, and we, went to setting everything up we were justified in believing it would be used. When faced with legal advice that the contact, as not extended as required, was no longer current ODX had backed themselves into a corner where they had no choice but to announce it. In frustration at not having any commitment was DHSC CK indicates that he thinks it is over when in fact it was no more over than it had been for the last 7 months or, again in my own view, not over at all just still not currently needed. Make of that what you will.

I stand to be corrected but I think it is something to do with the spike protein which we detect - different protein would actually mean a new disease not a new variant.

We have been led to believe that our test works on all variants.

Sorry as a final thought on this, lab based PCR test will not be able to cope with the volume of tests required with such few Red areas - we have been here before and PCR testing turned into a complete debacle with there was limited travel - now or whilst the travel market is open PCR testing will quickly fall into chaos again.

So you are looking for a clear Yes it can be utilised until 2023 if needed, in my opinion.

Dave certain not disagreeing with you on the poor logic of the situation just stating my belief that for now you must get both but this might change.

Sorry ODX have been given no…..

For completeness Calder, DHSC have been given, as I read it, no formal notification that the DHSC do not intend to utilise the contract but in a fit of madness ODX sought legal advise as to their current legal position and it was suggested by the legal eagles that as no extension from Phase 1 had been received the contract lapsed in April, I think. ODX sought clarification from the DHSC who, it would appear said they did not know what the current position was and ODX decided to deem it terminated. It may be but in my view at least it is far from clear - they asked a bod at the DHSC who I am willing to bet did not speak to Javid or even the treasury and instead simply said I don’t know but I am not able to confirm our plans - ODX panic and cover their backs by issuing a RNS saying the contract has lapsed. Your call.

Yes Clarekate the contract was to run until 2023 set over two Phases with no requirement for HMG to order or it appears to notify that the contract had lapsed - whatever that means in this situation. I believe there may have been a requirement for DHSC to give a periodic extension (from completion of phase 1) and it appears that this is missing - in the meantime we sit with the machinery which is ready to go.

PCR tests not currently at least set up to provide you with a code that can be used on a PLF - HMG unlikely to change the rules for potentially a short term requirement. I believe we are required to have both as I say, at least for now.

PCR are the only thing that can identify a particular strain which is now useful for HMG to know, LFT simply identify Covid - I do not make the rules but like you I just have to follow them.

I don’t pretend to understand the logic used by HMG I simply know that, at the moment at least, you are required to have the LFT booked before you can even get on a plane to return home and now it would appear that you also must get a PCR test when you are home. If you have seen anything that specifically counters this then please point me in that direction.