I asked you, have NUM made an announcement about not making frivilous and malicious reports about punters.
You responded, not to my question, but with a full speech about how NUM don't know who posted the warning, how its impossible for them to ever know who did and how NUM only made the warning they did because they knew it was released to a punter when they do not know the other.
All total assumptions on your part based on no evidence. All made on behalf of NUM based on nothing. And you didn't even answer my question. Which all you neede to do was say "no they have not done this". Insrtead of I will make a load of assumptions about NUMs awareness of matters.
I think you need to re-read my post Anth, as I didn't say anything of the bolded bit above. In fact, that's the exact opposite of what I said. My post said NUM do know who made the report, and I know this because they only allow reports to come from verified members (or the police, I've made reports to both in the past and they share info)
If I had just said "No" in answer to your question, I thought there would be follow up questions, so I thought I'd answer them ahead of time.
And again, at no point did I claim to be speaking for NUM, I just know more about the organisation than you because I have had help from them before so I know the process of reporting and they explain how they store and use information.
They are aware of reports getting back to clients and I know this in 2 ways. Firstly is Wayne stating he had been in contact with them. Secondly is that the lady taking my recent report asked if I would like them to wait before circulating the report in case of retribution, as they are aware of info being shared in the NE.
Xx