🎁 A holiday package to celebrate the season! Click here and shop now!

TextRanch

The best way to perfect your writing.

Discover why 1,062,726 users count on TextRanch to get their English corrected!

1. Input your text below.
2. Get it corrected in a few minutes by our editors.
3. Improve your English!

One of our experts will correct your English.

Our experts

The company has requested again vs The company requested again

Both phrases are correct, but they are used in different contexts. 'The company has requested again' is in the present perfect tense, indicating that the action of requesting has happened at an unspecified time before now. 'The company requested again' is in the simple past tense, indicating that the action of requesting happened at a specific time in the past.

Last updated: March 30, 2024 • 1197 views

The company has requested again

This phrase is correct and commonly used in English. It is in the present perfect tense, indicating an action that happened at an unspecified time before now.

This phrase is used to indicate that the company has made a request at some point before the present moment, and the action is relevant to the current situation.

Examples:

  • The company has requested again that all employees attend the training session.
  • The company has requested again to review the contract before signing.
  • The company has requested that its identity be treated a confidential.
  • A spokesman for the company has requested privacy for the family as they deal with this tragic loss.
  • It appears the company has been looted.
  • The company has developed a new tracking system.
  • My team's done an extensive review of all the company records Parsons has requested.
  • Today the company hasn't lost a copywriter... The company has gained a new art director.
  • The Company has offered me a handsome allowance.
  • The story makes investors think the company has money problems.
  • However, the company has stopped production and is currently trading in vehicles.
  • Therefore, the company has to export an essential part of its production.
  • The company has even lost his appetite.
  • The company has unofficially decided to employ me.
  • I'm afraid the company has spoiled my appetite.
  • The company has only one subsidiary in Slovenia, Elan Inventa d.o.o.
  • Since March 2005 the company has complied with this arrangement and with its ongoing monthly obligations.
  • Furthermore, it should be noted that the company has planned additional increased capacity.
  • Furthermore, it should be noted that the company has planned additional increased capacity.
  • Furthermore the company has publicly stated that it plans to increase its existing capacity.
  • The company has important information for her.
  • Again, the company has allotted for this training... one day.

Alternatives:

  • The company has once again requested
  • The company has asked again
  • The company has made another request
  • The company has reiterated their request
  • The company has renewed their request

The company requested again

This phrase is correct and commonly used in English. It is in the simple past tense, indicating an action that happened at a specific time in the past.

This phrase is used to indicate that the company made a request at a specific point in the past, and the action is not necessarily relevant to the current situation.

Examples:

  • The company requested again for an extension on the deadline.
  • The company requested again to change the meeting time.
  • Since no such excise duty is payable on export sales, the company requested the normal value to be adjusted accordingly.
  • Secondly, the company requested a mere deduction from the current MIP of amounts corresponding to the amount of the fixed anti-dumping duty.
  • On 24 August 2007, the Commission received a reasoned submission by TomTom in which the company requested a referral to the Commission pursuant to Article 4(5) of the Merger Regulation.
  • The entire amount of import duties foregone is taken as the numerator and not the excess remission/exemption, as the company requested, because the ALS does not fulfil the conditions laid down in Annex II to the basic Regulation.
  • Finally, as none of the companies requested MET, the Commission could not fully assess the reliability of the accounts which, inter alia, is crucial for establishing a relationship of trust on which undertakings are based.
  • Concerning the evidence collected from the national customs administration, which could not be disclosed to the Malaysian company for the reasons set out above, the company requested the Hearing Office to verify its accuracy.
  • Moreover, the exporting producer claimed that the current assessment of the criteria 2 and 3 contradicts the conclusion of the two previous investigations in which the company requested MET, and in which it was concluded that criteria 2 and 3 were met.
  • Three (groups of) companies requested individual examination.
  • Two other companies requested only IT.
  • One company requested that their claims were reconsidered.
  • Thirteen companies or groups of companies requested MET while one company requested only IT.
  • Before the Oral Hearing one company requested an in camera session.
  • Three companies requested formal admission to the proceedings as interested third parties.
  • Moreover, a minority of investment companies requested higher thresholds compared to other investors.
  • As set out in the provisional Regulation, one group of Chinese companies requested MET or, failing that, IT, while another group of Chinese companies requested IT only.
  • One Cambodian company requested the duties not be collected on imports of its products that were registered, for reasons of fairness.
  • As a result, one of these companies requested an individual duty independent from that of the other company.
  • As mentioned in recital 6 above, both of the cooperating Chinese groups of companies requested IT.
  • The same company requested that the Commission provides further details on the calculation of the constructed normal value of both cells and modules.
  • If a company requested a tax deferral in future, the Spanish authorities undertook to apply the general rules and not this measure.

Alternatives:

  • The company made the request again
  • The company asked again
  • The company reiterated their request
  • The company renewed their request
  • The company once again requested

Related Comparisons

What Our Customers Are Saying

Our customers love us! We have an average rating of 4.79 stars based on 283,125 votes.
Also check out our 2,100+ reviews on TrustPilot (4.9TextRanch on TrustPilot).

Why choose TextRanch?

Lowest prices
Up to 50% lower than other online editing sites.

Fastest Times
Our team of editors is working for you 24/7.

Qualified Editors
Native English experts for UK or US English.

Top Customer Service
We are here to help. Satisfaction guaranteed!

×

💝 TextRanch Holidays Offer! 💝️

25% special discount
Stock up on credits for the entire year!

Grab this offer now!