[64]

Just Iron wrote:

OK Some measured responses ..and some made their minds up and no way back. As always … I’m not sure what those who think Dave Hilton is a villain with bad intentions are posting for. To be proved right in the end? To damage the man? To taint any glimmers of light for ordinary Joes? To make any turnaround and progress more difficult? Or, as they maintain, all for the sake of truth and integrity. Place your bets.

I don’t want to damage anyone but cannot accept what is happening in his name and in support of him. That’s really damaging, anything damaging we try to remove from here if not true or unable to prove,hence some Saturday night melt downs we get

[64]

IT doesn’t say anything about being public in what I just wrote does it?
It says it the record can be removed earlier than if it’s after 30 days . nothing about being public.
it say if you get one it goes on the register ,it doesn’t say goes on the register after 30 days at all. Only mentions removing from the register, nothing about preventing it going on .It’s there in black and white .
“If you pay the full amount within one month, you can get the judgment removed from the register.” I might add FACT!
They cannot remove things from a register if not there can they?

[64]

He must have photos of a BBC director, he’s so bad and always has been. I just hate his voice

[64]

” I just hope we can keep it pretty civil and posters don’t revert to being disrespectful of each other, insulting and abusing.”

It couldn’t get any worse, we’ve had people’s homes pin pointed on google earth with sinister messages like ” how’s (wife’s name)” ,we’re watching you
We’ve had people threatened with having their throats slit ‘
We’ve had one case of a person ,proporting to be Hilton on twitter finding out what he wrongly thought was a twitter users real name and suggesting he was a convicted paedophile by searching his wrong name and promoting stories about a genuine paedo and intimating it’s this particular Twitter user.
Personally I don’t care what this chairman does at SUFC anymore, I just know he attracts the sort of persons above and hasn’t ever distanced himself from such behaviour and for that I find him distasteful .
I also don’t like that little verifiable business record, by verifiable I mean at companies house .
As for his own online behaviour and shoot from the hip pronouncements, good grief!

2 users thanked author for this post.

Interested Bystander, CMC

[64]

sufc_not_on_tour wrote:

Why can I not publicly name the party involved?
Because if the debt is satisfied within 30 days then the CCJ will not be made public and wiped from the record.
If it isn’t satisfied then it will be made public for all to see, in which case there will be no need for me to name the creditor.

Not true “FACT!”

CCJs and your credit rating
If you get a county court judgment (CCJ) or a high court judgment, it will stay on the Register of Judgments, Orders and Fines for 6 years.

Banks and loan companies use this information to decide whether to give you credit or loans.

If you pay the full amount within one month, you can get the judgment removed from the register.

Write to the court to say you’ve paid. You’ll need to send proof of payment from the person or business you owed money to.

If you pay after one month
If you pay after one month, you can get the record of the judgment marked as ‘satisfied’ in the register.

It will stay on the register for 6 years but people searching the register will see that you’ve paid.

Write to the court to say you’ve paid. You’ll need to send proof of payment from the person or business you owed money to.
It goe4s on record straight away according to the government

https://www.gov.uk/county-court-judgments-ccj-for-debt/ccjs-and-your-credit-rating

[64]

I was aiming it at you too . as much as anyone else

[64]

sufc_not_on_tour wrote:

The CCJ was for a supplier during the current owners tenure, FACT.
Was he given ample notice that a claim was to be made, yes, FACT.
Did he ignore it, yes, FACT.
Do I know who that supplier is, yes I do , FACT.
Can I divulge that publicly, no that would be wrong and I’m not prepared to do that, FACT.
Do I care if the usual suspect don’t believe me, no I don’t.

Snot stated it is a fact is the only true fact , the rest is heresay that some of us believe to be true but for whatever reason SNOT appears afraid to put forward actual facts
“Do I know who that supplier is, yes I do , FACT.
Can I divulge that publicly, no that would be wrong and I’m not prepared to do that, FACT.” why would i tbe wrong if it’s in the courts?

[64]

This is getting as bad as the old days ,are the idiots back?.People on this site are less interesting b to talk about than thev Iron

[64]

Yeah ifc you provide a link with real information

[64]

Can’t you tell usx what happened back in February of this year? Perhaps a link to the actual event?

1 user thanked author for this post.

Just Iron

[64]

why do “right wing comedians” have to keep rubbing our noses in it, It’s disgusting .Can’t they just get on with it without having to tell us what they are?
Reminds me of Jim Davidson et al, more interested in being seen as reactionary than actually being funny

[64]

Cramps for me but I’ll gladly tap my feet to either

1 user thanked author for this post.

Deereyme66

[64]

It’s a bit rough to completely blame the idiot for this. This could be a historic debt from Swann era and if the courts take as long as other services to process it could have been in the pipeline a while without any court contact from the final demand arriving and this judgement?

[64]

Well done for paying some staff?

[64]

so a club that needs fans can’t be bothered to answer the phone and awaywego blasts the fan for it?
Dumbest way to run a business if that’s what we can expect ,what if we start getting fans wanting to come backand give us much needed funds ,will they just not bother selling tickets, go bust and blame the fans for not coming? and continue blaming Swann ?

2 users thanked author for this post.

Northumbiron, Siderite

[64]

I’d suspect they are too confused by the complexities and illogical ways of our legal system

[64]

A partner at the national law firm Swann is using to evict SUFC from GP. One normal day… https://t.co/hKe2Qedf0w

— IRON BRU (@ironbru_net) August 15, 2023

Wow ,I never saw that coming

[64]

Liz wins it for me

[64]

Should I put an offer in?

1 user thanked author for this post.

Just Iron

[64]

My proof of funds,think I’ll buy GP and worry about paying for it later, might get a few thousand to chip in and help.

[64]

that’s not ,your post is

[64]

https://www.knightsplc.com/company/our-professionals/ian-dawson/

[64]

you’ve lost me now,

[64]

keep digging

[64]

Pop these chips into the fryer?

1 user thanked author for this post.

Deereyme66

[64]

as conspiracy loons say all over the world. do your own research ,picture is last
clue
winner gets a biscuit

[64]

Not on this site NI,save that for others

1 user thanked author for this post.

Northumbiron

[64]

as the usual suspects were starting to try to deflect blame to the trust again I asked the question and got this reply.
‘”We are on the SAG, but we’ve not been invited to any meetings in the last couple of months. The business is split into two parts and we only attend part one. The ground capacity restrictions were probably part two, but we’re asking the question.

Cheers John”
I am sure they’ll let us know when they get a reply off Open book Dave

[64]

cassidystash wrote:

Somebody said earlier that the Iron Trust had representation on the SAG. Can’t they influence their decision in the Clubs favour? DH seems to make some very valid points in his statement.

In the clubs favour?
That’s not how safety works

1 user thanked author for this post.

Northumbiron

[64]

Awaywego wrote:

No Siderite that’s not what caused the supporter cap talk, it was just someone making a rumour up nothing more.
Oops

6 users thanked author for this post.

Northumbiron, Awaywego, sufc_not_on_tour, Cliff Byrne's Right Peg, Pele, Siderite

[Author]

Posts