Na but theres certainly been some ASS tapping going onQuote:
Originally Posted by GreenPJ
Printable View
Na but theres certainly been some ASS tapping going onQuote:
Originally Posted by GreenPJ
I just had a quick look on rangersmedia as can't get the programme in cork...apparently nothing new and nothing to worry about
exactly, why would you apply for a loan, that doesn't need to be repaid, and only apply for 30k, surely you would want at least a million:cbQuote:
Originally Posted by Beefster
Clever lad. Follow the money....:wink:Quote:
Originally Posted by semaj64
Chick Dung was spinning the line a few months back, when it was revealed that Ogilvie had received EBT payments, that Ogilvie's payments would only pay for a "good night out". Well, either Campbell was telling him porkies, or Chick's idea of a night out is slightly different from most.Quote:
Originally Posted by Barney McGrew
Just checked a Hun forum for a chuckle and the consensus is
who is Sammy I've never seen him at Ibrox
BBC have no evidence its a sham
Sammy deserves a kicking
Graham Spiers new name is Britney( which did actually make me laugh)
If there was that much evidence we would have a ruling by now
Sammy is like an only excuse character(don't think they get irony)
the BBC is run by taigs
Sammy is a Celtic plant
don't think they like poor old Sammy much Haha
Bollocks. That's unfair. By the way BHFL, can I ask you for loan of 100k? I don't know if you do loans, or even if you exist but I just thought I would completely randomly ask you for a loan that I'm hoping you might say yes to on the basis of my never having to repay it. That ok for you?Quote:
Originally Posted by bighairyfaeleith
no worries I'll just borrow it from another BHFL scheme anyways so it's all coolQuote:
Originally Posted by One Day Soon
Other than the complicity of Duff and Phelps in the administration and takeover, it didn't tell us anything we didn't already know.
Perhaps the extent of the EBT scheme (which is staggering) but when one of the recipients is the president of the SFA, do you really see any damning outcomes from their investigation?
Self preservation has always been the order of the day with the SPL and undoubtedly, they'll sweep most of this under the Hampden turf.
What happens on a legal front is another matter - I would fully expect that Duff and Phelps need to come out and quickly make a statement in response to all of this or they'll swiftly be removed and proceedings perhaps started against them.
What they say may not even have a bearing actually - I'd expect they simply MUST be taken out of the process and investigated.
Doubt it - Probably the same scenario as Duff and Duffer suing themselves, IMOQuote:
Originally Posted by One Day Soon
one for CWG or caversham i suspect, but who can remove an administrator, the courts?Quote:
Originally Posted by The Story So Far...
Who would then investigate them, the police?
Statement quickly released from Duff and Phelps, ignoring all accusations leveled at them:Quote:
Originally Posted by The Story So Far...
Quote:
Paul Clark, joint administrator, said: "The use of EBTs at Rangers goes back many years and was a matter of public record in the annual accounts. Our primary focus has been ensuring the survival of Rangers Football Club and attracting a new buyer for the business as well as investigating the financial situation at the Club since the takeover in May 2011. We and the Club will continue to give every assistance to the football authorities on issues affecting the Club. It should, however, be noted that the First Tier Tax tribunal has yet to publish its findings in relation to the use of EBTs."
I don't know anything about that. I don't know where your money comes from. I don't care where your money comes from. I just take it and spend it and never pay it back. To me you are a giant fruit machine that pays out the jackpot every time I play it. And I don't even have to put any coins into it. You're such a good fruit machine that you pay out to all my mates on every play too.Quote:
Originally Posted by bighairyfaeleith
that statement completely ignores there knowledge of the ticketus deal during the buyoutQuote:
Originally Posted by The Story So Far...
Yep. The dog that is spectacularly not barking right now.Quote:
Originally Posted by bighairyfaeleith
The Court can remove an Administrator, but I think there would have to be a petition from some other interested party, eg a creditor.Quote:
Originally Posted by bighairyfaeleith
As for investigation, unless there was a suggestion of fraud, the only one I could see would be one by D & P's professional body for the alleged conflict of interest.
A side note.... it rips my knitting that people constantly refer to , in this case the forensic accountant, the Institute of Chartered Accountants.There ain't no such beast. There is the ICA of Scotland, the ICA of Ireland, and the ICA in England and Wales. Rant done.
If the courts can appoint the administrator, I'm pretty sure they would have recourse to remove an administrator, particularly if the major creditor appealed in light of what we've seen tonight. Clearly with conflicting interests such as those highlight suggest they aren't fit for purpose.Quote:
Originally Posted by bighairyfaeleith
I dare say legal investigation is one route open - there'll undoubtedly be a regulatory body for accountants who could probably also investigate them (maybe even the FSA, but I don't know if that extends beyond the banking industry) but I agree, probably one of the more knowledgeable chaps to answer.
Or CIMA, or ACCA...Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Do HMRC really just sit on the sidelines with D&P still in place given the clear conflict of interest revealed tonight? Surely they must petition?
Are the regulatory differences between the ICA of Scotland/England and Wales likely to be substantially different to permit the type of behaviour we've seen from this evening though?Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
I'd imagine the "fit and proper" test would be transferable across all UK/Irish accountancy firms, within the structure of British finance law?
Is it a Golden Receiver?Quote:
Originally Posted by One Day Soon
It's only an allegation at the moment. The BBC have been wrong before.Quote:
Originally Posted by One Day Soon
I suspect that HMRC will want to consider their position carefully, and get as much of the "evidence" that the BBC seem to have, before thy hit the Court.
D&P could, of course, resign.
Sadly i think they are almost right....That will not change a thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalianwanda
They will be exactly the same. My point was one of pedantry, that the forensic chap was introduced as a member of a body that doesn't freaking exist.... :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by The Story So Far...
Heh heh. I think we all know that when people talk about THE Institute of Chartered Accountants, they are referring to ICAEW. :stirrer:Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
I'm guessing the likelihood of HMRC petitioning the Court of Session to have their own admins appointed, as per the original intention will become increasingly likely now?
A buyer in place and CVA agreed by 6th June, and a newco formed in time for next season are looking like utter fantasy now.
Looking at that bottle of single malt on the sideboard I'm saving for liquidation day. Shouldn't be long now till I get to open it.
Alex Rae £569,000??? The boy done well :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by down-the-slope
It did, however, provide evidence of what we all thought.
A wee bit surprised to see George Adams on that list.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Story So Far...
F R O :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by grunt
There is a senior employee at ICAS, part of whose job it is to come down heavily on anybody who follows the branding of ICAEW as THE ICA.
:nerd:Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Yeah, but I can assure you that the guys at D&P won't be members of ICAS. :wink:Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveF