🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <RQONpHAB3tG3EwnW@msrice.co.uk>,
  Marshall Rice <Marshall@msrice.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <1928@thanatos.win-uk.net>, Paul Burridge
> <osiris@thanatos.win-uk.net> writes
> >
> >In article <ant1621201cbXL#k@pharpech.demon.co.uk>, Dave Roberts
> >(Dave@pharpech.demon.co.uk) writes:
> >>In article <1916@thanatos.win-uk.net>, Paul Burridge
> >><URL:mailto:osiris@thanatos.win-uk.net> wrote:
> >
> >>> Whatever anyone may think of the merits (or otherwise) of LG's
> >>> postings, they don't fall into that category.
> >>
> >>He would not have been dishonest. He would have been saving himself a lot of
> >>trouble...
> >
> >Had Demon done what he reasonably asked of them, they would have
> >saved *themselves* a lot of trouble.
>
> Indeed, not to mention money.
> --
> Marshall Rice
>

I believe the real key point here, and one which will undoubtedly be a major
focus of this case when the trial finally comes is that Demon had a history of
ignoring such complaints at the time he made his.  If he can prove that they
did so, then Demon may well be out more money.

Undoubtedly, the one who will finally benefit will be the lawyers......For
both parties.

--
Richard Jackson

-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/       Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own