[Guest_freelander2_*]

Given the suggestion that the company is about to be liquidated, I wonder how the directors propose to get around this slight problem?

image upload no compression

[Wooden Spoon]

freelander2 said:

1486665329[/url]"]1486665329[/url]"]1486665329[/url]' post='[url="tel:[url="tel:[url="tel:1278574"]1278574[/url]"]1278574[/url]"]1278574[/url]']Given the suggestion that the company is about to be liquidated, I wonder how the directors propose to get around this slight problem?image upload no compression

His 5%

Funny that he/they even got the "limited company" bit wrong. What a pair of buffoons

This post has been edited by a kick in the balls: 09 February 2017 - 06:53 PM

[60s 70s Spireite]

freelander2, on 09 February 2017 - 06:35 PM, said:

Given the suggestion that the company is about to be liquidated, I wonder how the directors propose to get around this slight problem?

Fascinating point of law isn't it.
Mr Liquidator 'I can report that the company is limited by guarantee, so the members' [CT and LS] liability is restricted to [normally say £1] ordinary'.
Creditor: 'Does that mean there is no limit to their liability?'
'Over to you Mr Corporate Lawyer'

[dim view]

60s 70s Spireite, on 09 February 2017 - 06:51 PM, said:

Fascinating point of law isn't it.
Mr Liquidator 'I can report that the company is limited by guarantee, so the members' [CT and LS] liability is restricted to [normally say £1] ordinary'.
Creditor: 'Does that mean there is no limit to their liability?'
'Over to you Mr Corporate Lawyer'

So, they can presumably squirm out of this if there is no liquidation within a year of which date?

[Wooden Spoon]

dim view said:

1486666911[/url]' post='1278584']
So, they can presumably squirm out of this if there is no liquidation within a year of which date?

Resigning as company director

[60s 70s Spireite]

dim view, on 09 February 2017 - 07:01 PM, said:

So, they can presumably squirm out of this if there is no liquidation within a year of which date?

Its resigning as a member (like the golf club). Again a Company Law point, if you resign whilst debts are outstanding, does that abrogate you from responsibility if those debts remain unpaid more than a year later?

[dim view]

60s 70s Spireite, on 09 February 2017 - 07:14 PM, said:

Its resigning as a member (like the golf club). Again a Company Law point, if you resign whilst debts are outstanding, does that abrogate you from responsibility if those debts remain unpaid more than a year later?

So, for a layman like me, is this it.....

The DC is dormant - kids are no longer turning up for coaching.
FBT has incorporated the dormant company, but Turner and Sutcliffe remain as Directors and forgot to limit their liability to a £1 when they formed it.

So

If FBT declare the DC insolvent with an estimated debt of £150k, T and S are responsible for the debt.
If FBT don't liquidate the DC, then FBT are responsible for the debt on an ongoing basis.

Is that right?

[Benno Spire]

This sorry saga just seems to keep rumbling on

[For your eyes only]

Nigel have you seen my text?

[Guest_freelander2_*]

freelander2, on 09 February 2017 - 03:25 PM, said:

I believe some parents this afternoon are compiling a list of what they are owed. The amounts that I have seen so far total a figure approaching £5K.

One family are due £1,500, another £1,300.

Running total now in excess of £7,500.

[60s 70s Spireite]

dim view, on 09 February 2017 - 08:37 PM, said:

.
1. FBT has incorporated the dormant company, but Turner and Sutcliffe remain as Directors and forgot to limit their liability to a £1 when they formed it.

So

2. If FBT declare the DC insolvent with an estimated debt of £150k, T and S are responsible for the debt.
3. If FBT don't liquidate the DC, then FBT are responsible for the debt on an ongoing basis.

Is that right?

1. True
2. Quite possibly, but it's very much Corporate Law
3. I can't see how FBT can be responsible for debts incurred by CFC Dev. School, unless they contracted to do so, which I doubt.

[spireitenag]

For your eyes only, on 09 February 2017 - 09:46 PM, said:

Nigel have you seen my text?

Just read it thanks.

[Johnnyspireite7]

Anyone think it's unusual that brockwell spireite has been very quiet on this subject since not only did the faeces hit the fan but the whole freakin' cow 🐮 did?!?

[moondog]

freelander2, on 09 February 2017 - 09:58 PM, said:

Running total now in excess of £7,500.

Latest £7,777 (12 individuals owed) I'm told FBT will be sorting it

[Mrhappy]

moondog, on 10 February 2017 - 04:39 PM, said:

Latest £7,777 (12 individuals owed) I'm told FBT will be sorting it

Is it FBT who owe the money?

[Guest_freelander2_*]

moondog, on 10 February 2017 - 04:39 PM, said:

Latest £7,777 (12 individuals owed) I'm told FBT will be sorting it

Good.

I'm glad certain individuals are starting to listen.

[DIFH]

Johnnyspireite7, on 10 February 2017 - 04:26 PM, said:

Anyone think it's unusual that brockwell spireite has been very quiet on this subject since not only did the faeces hit the fan but the whole freakin' cow 🐮 did?!?

Look the transfer window has just closed - he's been a busy boy.

[moondog]

Mrhappy, on 10 February 2017 - 04:43 PM, said:

Is it FBT who owe the money?

Probably not, but they have seemingly agreed to pay it, wether they take action to recover it from the source of the problem is a matter for them. An issue also reported to them are 10 scholars who have paid for kit but haven't received everything ordered

[spireitenag]

moondog, on 10 February 2017 - 04:53 PM, said:

I think that's arguable but they have seemingly agreed to pay it, wether they take action to recover it from the source of the problem is a matter for them. An issue also reported to them are 10 scholars who have paid for kit but haven't received everything ordered

Sounds like they are doing the decent thing.

Perhaps the start to rebuilding bridges with a lot of folks who fell foul of Sutcliffe.

[Guest_freelander2_*]

moondog, on 10 February 2017 - 04:53 PM, said:

Probably not, but they have seemingly agreed to pay it, wether they take action to recover it from the source of the problem is a matter for them. An issue also reported to them are 10 scholars who have paid for kit but haven't received everything ordered

See this link, http://www.thecfss.c...post&p=1243142. Answers provided by AC which Rob was kind enough to post in response to my questions.

Question 2 and AC's answer reads as follows:

2) Whose shares FBT have acquired and in which business?

AC's answer: 50% of The “Company” is CFC INTERNATIONAL FOOTBALL ACADEMY, Registered Number: 09962276
incorporated in England & Wales on: 21st January 2016

At the AGM, the top table were still referring to FBT's share acquisition yet in media interviews that followed there appears to have been a bit of a u-turn done on the subject.

Just what is FBT's position, sponsor or shareholder?