Patel seeks damages for slipping on greasy Levy

Recently, it was announced that a man was set to claim damages for slipping on a petal outside a flower shop. But, what about the case of Lord Levy slipping up in relation to Mr (not even Lord) Chai Patel? The "'Loans for peerages' scandal erupts when Mr Patel complains of blocked peerage and reveals Labour took secret loans from him". However, it is clear that whatever Labour might like to call Mr Patel's donation, it was not a loan at commercial rates, because no interest was set and no date was set for repayment, therefore, it was required to be declared by the Labour party and this was not done. That an offer of a peerage was made to Mr Patel by Lord Levy in acceptance for a financial inducement is clear by the following statement: "Mr Patel says: 'There is clearly a history here and a reality of peerages for fund-raising'". Is it any wonder then that "John Yates, the senior detective who led the cash-for-honours investigation, made it as plain as he could that he disagreed with Crown Prosecution Service over its decision not to bring any charges"? Especially, given the text of paragraph 30 of the CPS statement "In relation to possible breaches of the 2000 Act, we are satisfied that we cannot exclude the possibility that any loans made – all of which were made following receipt by the Labour Party of legal advice - can properly be characterised as commercial".