Member Info for GrumpyScouser

Just so we remain unemotional and factual.... Here's some more prolonged ramping: http://www.lse.co.uk/share-regulatory-news.asp?shareprice=WTG&ArticleCode=9jvwc6kt&ArticleHeadline=Holdings_in_Company from one of the fools who is being separated from his money. Have a lovely weekend....I'm off to play golf

All those after hours buys again. Someone still thinks this is worth more than that guy on the internet. Weird eh?

Boyzee

oh gawd.....and the cor blimey Dell Boy who likes his liver for breakfast.....what the hell was his name?

I trust them more than some bloke on the internet.

Agreed....do the day job while thecrest gets sorted. There is no quick fix unfortunately.

Its easy enough guys: his full name is on the RNS. This is him https://www.linkedin.com/in/readegriffith/

Perhaps he hasnt finished buying yet......so his pals are keeping it down. Shameful when this can happen

On its way......

What a waste of posts...and you accuse marsh of bollix lol

Youll just have to get over the fact that i'm not trying to IMPLY anything. If the facts change, then they change. In this country (sometimes unfortunately) legal innocence is presumed until guilt is proven. Moral guilt is a separate question.

My inference is 100% unambiguous: to date, ZERO charges have been brought. Your frustration at that will not change the legal system. For the record: i would gladly see Terry choke on his lunch....regardless: we have a legal system

Jump up and down for what reason? There was a contract which defined how the escrow could be released or held back.

Sorry: i misunderstood the inference. They could of course give up...but its unlikely: this is all being funded by their new owners who bought the business for peanuts so pursuit is worth the few quid it will cost for a result. Unless........the SFO close the case.

Sorry but thats not factual to say the cards are all in sgh and sfo's hands. You havent seen WTGs defence: nor have I. SGH have filed a claim. WTG will file a resoonse by the due date in October. The process will move forward.

LOL...... I dont think the SFO work on the basis that they will accept evidence as and when one of the parties finds it convenient.

But you are also suggesting 'this or that'. The barrister (chosen by SGH) found that on balance the claim had a chance of succeeding. What you appear not to be aware of, is the detail which has been discussed elsewhere regarding WTG's stance and their reasoning for that. At the time I was sceptical, however there have been several subsequent situations where SGH have shown their negotiating style which is based, it appears, on the more confrontational litigation which some have said prevails in Australia. Noise and bluster don't neccessarily mean factual. We shall see: neither your nor my opinions are worth a bean. Only the decision of the judge. They can not 'call it to court already' because there are processes to go through.

For me the SFO/SGH questions are interdependent:- - I'm guessing that the SFO have exhausted their enquiries after 2yrs but are interested to see wht the SGH claim brings out if anything. - I'm also guessing that SGH are hoping that the SFO have found something actionable which their 70 lawyers and external consultants failed to find (oops). If the SFO close their enquiry, then I feel that SGH will struggle to prove their claim (which WTG already seem to see as unfounded) beyond reasonable doubt. Time will tell.

I've just sent the following request for information Dear Sirs Let me firstly state that I am aware you are unable to comment on the specifics of a case. My question is one of procedure & regulation in SFO enquiries. Can you please confirm:- What are the SFO obligations with regard to closure of an enquiry within a given timeframe should no grounds for action be found? Can a case be held open for an unlimited timeframe when no grounds for action are found? I was unable to find answers to these points on your website (including the document Joint Guidance on Corporate Prosecutions) and, as a private investor who has been watching this lack of public progress for two years, I am concerned that the ongoing open status continues to have an impact on my investment, further damaging my finances. Once again: I am not seeking answers to case-related questions, but rather clarity on your processes and regulatory framework. Thanks in advance for your help. Grumpy

Oh there's absolutey no intent to mislead. I simply stated facts: to date there have been ZERO charges brought after 18 months of investigation. In other words: to date they have found ZERO grounds for bringing charges regardless how unhappy people are. I hope that restatement is not misleading ;-)