Printable View
If anyone who does business with RFC in a professional capacity has any suspicion of money laundering, they have a legal duty to report that suspicion. Not to do so is a crime in itself.Quote:
Originally Posted by Deansy
Given the profile of TRFC, any "dodgy" investment will be scrutinised by many, particularly fans of other clubs. That in itself puts extra pressure on their professional advisers to do the "right" thing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Nice theory.
How did that work out in Hearts' case?
We wouldn't know.Quote:
Originally Posted by keekaboo
Any reports are treated in confidence. Once the report has been made, that's the end of it as far as the reporter is concerned. It's then up to the police.
Due to the lack of any prosecution I think it is fair to assume that complaint was filed under BQuote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Was a complaint made?Quote:
Originally Posted by Weststandwanab
[QUOTE=CropleyWasGod;4319931]Was a complaint made?[/QUOTE
My understanding is more than one was made but of course they are still under investigation.
[QUOTE=Weststandwanab;4319960]Which would support my point. Complaints were made, and investigations undertaken.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
The same scenario would happen in Rangers case, and would be more likely to.
[QUOTE=CropleyWasGod;4319970]Indeed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Weststandwanab
I reported a ex client under these provisions under the same legislation ten years ago along with (I.M.O.) cast iron proof from a third party.
Today they still trade using "a similar name" and are on their fourth Phoneix Company with the previous 3 having ripped of H.M.R.C. for V.A.T. and P.A.Y.E..
And you wonder why some of us think this legislation is laughable ?
Anyway bring on Falkirk again
Latest Board Moves Trio Suspended
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/31817509
Dave Kings's strategy will be to just stop paying things he doesn't like( aka the Rangers way) and the glib and shameless liar will say "see you in court".Quote:
Originally Posted by angus hibee
So ****ing predictable.
Let's hope they have the same staying power and sense of morality as the south African tax man and judge!Quote:
Originally Posted by Spike Mandela
How does this work when Ashley has a right under the conditions of his loan to have two representitives on the board??Quote:
Originally Posted by angus hibee
I'm guessing that was expected and nothing significant?Quote:
Originally Posted by angus hibee
I'm guessing they're going to try and prove his loan deal/security is null and void. Good luck with that one :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by Iain G
Especially if they took and spent the money! It's a commercial contract validated by their actions.Quote:
Originally Posted by jonty
My Rangers supporting mate is heading along to Ibrox tonight, first time in ages, for the match against QOS and says it's a sell out. Hun hoards return lets just hope QOS do the business.
As an aside, he told me his ST is in his brother's wallet and he is down south. It will cost him £5 to get a replacement ticket (£15 at Celtic Park according to his wife, a Celtic ST holder). Imagine the venting of spleens on here if something similar was in place at Easter Road.
The more they spend on lawyers the less they spend on players. Hope this is long and bloody. BTW how is Paul Murray acting chairman ? Thought, as on board of liquidated rangers he was bared for 5 years ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Bostonhibby
Have i completely missed something here...Does DK not have to pass the fit and proper test before he becomes involved?Quote:
Originally Posted by angus hibee
Seems like the SFA are going to bend over backwards to help The Rangers....as the noise from them is non existant!
I'm really becoming sick of all this crap...SFA should of stamped their authorite a long time ago surely!
I think they plan to just ignore everything at Ibrox and hope nobody notices.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan69
You can't just suspend a Director!
http://www.theguardian.com/football/...derek-llambiasQuote:
Originally Posted by Andy74
In response to Rangers’ announcement, Easdale’s spokesman Jack Irvine issued a statement through the Press Association that read: “We are surprised at the announcement as you cannot suspend a director under the law of Scotland. We also note that they talk about an investigation. Sandy Easdale welcomes that as he has absolutely nothing to fear.”
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spike Mandela
Ding Ding!
:take that
It really is beyond belief...but no surprise.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
And you wonder why our game is a laughing stock!
Only in Scotland could something like this happen....
Would there be any point in contacting the SFA to ask if they are going to start implementing the rules they make? Probably not!
To be honest, I dont see the point. The SFA and the SPFL are democracies. They are made up of all the other clubs including Hibs. They are designed to take any flack from fans.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan69
If you really want to put some pressure on about this then the fans need to take it up with their own clubs.
Have we asked Hibs why they are turning a blind eye to all this?
Dave King isn't on the Board.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan69
Not sure what it is that Hibs are turning a blind eye to.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Another club has internal squabbles. As long as it doesn't unduly affect us, it's not really our place to complain to anyone.
Does all this removing and suspending mean the Newcastle lads will be sent packing too?
But Murray is acting chairman. Is this allowed as he was director of liquidated rangers ?Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
CWG, given the influence he appears to be exerting currently, would you consider him to be a 'shadow director'?
(I'm not saying that means he has to pass the F&P test, it's more a potential infringement of company law)
Neither is MA but he still got fined for having an influence :stirrer:Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod