Member Info for dusterhater

Some interesting points lordlash

Ok see it now

Lordlash not ash

Cannot see your reply lordash ?

By an sophisticated con trick ?

I realise its not that simple now - but before all this court case started - ? Shirley could have done it before decided to default ??

So why not just wait for the NY loan company to do DD then if all agreeable have papers ready to sign by FRR at this stage sack Hope - then FRR can sign the new loan and pay back O/R - Or am I missing something ?

Or its just one big con - which I dont think it is for record

Am I correct in thinking both the claim and the default are now wrapped in one case or are they separate ? If separate what case is heard first ? As I guess the order could be very important and highly consequential if frr loose one or both ??

I tried to slit mine but the knife was blunt - then tried to hang from a tree but the branch snapped - then jumped in front if train but it veered off on a off shoot track - I flipin give up

Interesting point - could someone in the know please clarify

Considering zz is supposed to really clued up and he shirley would of taken the advice of top lawers before defaulting (not known if he did though) if this all turns to sh ite now and our (shareholders) hard earned vanishes into the greasy palms of the loan sharks - then who thinks this could be one big con to rob us of our shareholdings ? I am not saying I think thats the case - tick up if you think this could be happening - give user name also if so desired

Hi tb I dont know where it came from hope its true though lol

Well seeing as zz has stated that he is always 100% sure of winning if he goes to court then I would be very surprised if he has made a monumental _uck up -especially when you consider he presumably would of had top legal advice.

Exactly - these brilliant posts really do make a difference to ones state of mind -

Well done all - certainly helps keep the confidence up

Ditto - fu ck ing hope so

That's great and I hope it works out like that - I think the point your missing is OR dont want the loan paid back - they want the asset - and so because FRR have defaulted on the loan OR think they are entitled

I think it is ridiculous that there no clause in the loan agreement that says if frr wanted to take out another loan to pay back Hope in FULL then Hope would have to stand aside and veto his vote

I know zibs it stinks - but obviously frr took out the loan and a obviously with a condition Hope became a member of the bod (so as to protect his investment ) so may be frr should not have agreed to Hope being a director at the time ?