Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

One law for the rich and another for the poor! Why do they need to debate this? It has and always will be, it does not matter how long they talk about this it will never change. More expenses to claim for them and a total waste of tax payers money yet again!

  • Like 1
Posted

So Yahoo sidesteps the injunction by referring to him as "former bank chief"? A whole world of difference between that and "banker" then! Another injunction; another £50K in legal costs - please; ching!

Can you take out an injunction against being reffered to as "former chief of a near-failed bank who is not living in the real world, and who - if it were not already obvious - clearly has more wholly undeserved money than sense"?

If the word banker now has derrogatory connotations I wonder who exactly had a significant hand in this coming about?

Posted

So Yahoo sidesteps the injunction by referring to him as "former bank chief"? A whole world of difference between that and "banker" then! Another injunction; another £50K in legal costs - please; ching!

Can you take out an injunction against being reffered to as "former chief of a near-failed bank who is not living in the real world, and who - if it were not already obvious - clearly has more wholly undeserved money than sense"?

If the word banker now has derrogatory connotations I wonder who exactly had a significant hand in this coming about?

Aye, what he said........... ;)

Create a free account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×
×
  • Create New...