Mary Akanbi
2nd June, 2024
Strangely, Multi-Choice Nigeria Limited desperately replied my Pre-Action Notice even after the action has been filed before the court.
So, Multi-Choice really thought I was joking when I petitioned it in November 2023 demanding that its subscription be metered or regulated to read ‘pay per view’ or ‘pay during viewing’.
I’m curious to have the company reply my Pre-Action Notice in May 2024 after the action has been filed already, noting that the Pre-Action Notice was issued since November 2023. The company ought to know that its reply to my Pre-Action Notice at this time is not only needless but has no purpose to serve, having taken the action it sought to prevent.
So, why Reply to a Pre-Action Notice instead of reacting to the action in court that has already been served? The company should be channeling its energy toward defending the suit against it and not be replying to my Pre-Action Notice at this time.
Meanwhile, the matter comes up on the 10th of June 2024, so why reply to a letter that was hitherto ignored, instead of filing your defence to the suit pending before the Federal High Court?
In any case, the company’s letter (reply to my Pre-Action Notice) is expectedly vague and can only qualify as a failed attempt to justify its exploitative billings against Nigerian customers and I shall pursue the matter to a conclusive end.
M. O. Idam, Esq.
See the company’s reply letter below;
