Discussion about this post

User's avatar
SteveBC's avatar

What an interesting take on this situation, and I think more valid than many if not all others. Very, very interesting. And I laughed out loud at the picture and its caption. Delightfully apropos.

Expand full comment
JoeD's avatar

Still searching for an answer…sent this today to Pompey Mags

FAO F Thornton-Dale

With regard to your response May 2025 where you reference the email below:

At no time has a satisfactory explanation been provided as to name a LJA as a court.

If Sian Jones and Tom Ring cannot produce guidance that authorise this naming convention, and as you are so certain in the mail below coupled with your recent reply, I ask you to produce proof and evidence for your assertion that using LJA as a naming convention is permitted and accurate.

This is not an FOI as I recognise exemption will be invoked. Rather I cite your assertions and demand evidence which should be non contentious and easy to produce evidence by way of guidelines or protocol documents.

In this way it will satisfy a further query as to why Fareham Borough Council use the same LJA naming convention with the summons they print. How would FBC know that use of LJA names are acceptable if not for written instructions from the court?

Without vexation or frivolity and in true earnest to discover the truth

Regard

Joseph

Expand full comment
3 more comments...

No posts