back to article Telecoms provider Oricom working with NHS fraud officers in ongoing probe

Scottish telecoms provider Oricom has said it is working with NHS fraud officers in an ongoing investigation into its NHS contracts in Scotland. The statement follows reports in the Daily Mirror and Daily Record that its offices had been raided in relation to phone maintenance deals between Oricom and communications chiefs at …

  1. Thecowking

    Trying to work out what's wrong with the statement to warrant [sic]?

    I know ensure is not how an American would spell it, but it's correct for this side of the pond, and I can't see how else you'd have them spell their in this context?

    I know there's a corrections email, but this is just weird. Am I senile and reading it wrong?

    1. Deckmunki

      That's why I clicked through to the comments, too.

      "Their" is definitely the correct way to write it, unless the copy ed it simply trolling us...? ;o)

    2. disgustedoftunbridgewells Silver badge

      Oh good - I was wondering the same thing and assumed I'd forgotten how to grammar.

      1. Thecowking

        I see the ensure issue now, it should be assure.

        Now to crack the their.

    3. Hans Neeson-Bumpsadese Silver badge

      I think the issue is that the NHS is a singular body, so it should say "its" rather than "their"....but I could be wrong

      1. disgustedoftunbridgewells Silver badge

        As far as I'm aware, in British English, organisations are referred to in the plural. It's American English where organisations are referred to in the singular.

      2. Alan Hope

        Yes, it's "the NHS is" not "the NHS are".

  2. Tommy G1

    I'd assume that the term 'NHS' refers to the single monolithic entity and therefore it should be "its investigation" rather than "their investigation"?

    Fully prepared to stand corrected though

    1. Thecowking

      That sort of makes sense. Assuming that you ignore the everyday usage of plurality for organisations in English which is everywhere.

      I mean it's probably not in grammar guides yet, but it is definitely a common and normal usage. I am willing to accept that the editor is sticking to a guide which states that organisations are singular.

      Mystery solved!

    2. Wensleydale Cheese

      Had this debate with a US journalist a few years ago.

      In the US, a corporation is always referred to as a singular entity, but in the UK we tend to think of the people who work there, hence plural on this side of the pond.

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Glass Houses

    "Their" -> "its"; "ensure" -> "assure"! Dear, dear . . .

  4. WatAWorld

    Does being "raided" have a different meaning over there?

    Their offices were "raided".

    On the western side of the Atlantic that almost always means either raided by the police, or raided by the IRS with the support of the police.

    So how can this not be a police matter? Does being raided have some other meaning over there?

    1. A Nother Handle

      Re: Does being "raided" have a different meaning over there?

      It often has criminal connotations, particularly in the tabloid style aped by el Reg, evoking images of bank raids and jewel theives. The article makes it sound as though the offices were raided by an intruder so I'm just as mystified as to why the police aren't yet involved.

    2. Terry Barnes

      Re: Does being "raided" have a different meaning over there?

      Regulators and other official bodies have the legal right to enter offices and seize stuff without notice in the course of an investigation. That's because people who've done bad stuff often shred, delete or otherwise dispose of evidence that may not help their case.

  5. Tom -1
    Unhappy

    "raided"

    "because people who've done bad stuff often shred, delete or otherwise dispose of evidence that may not help their case"

    The reason that some bodies are given such powers is as you state, but sometimes the reason those powers are excercised is not for their intended purpose but rather inspired by vindictiveness (much damage can be done to a business by depriving it of access to its data by impounding all its documents and computer systems). At least it is hard to attribute the retention of documents and computer equipment for very long periods after it has been ascertained that they conain no such evidence to any other motivation.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020