LNS is currently back in the headlines. It might therefore be a good time to try to set out a timeline describing correspondence we had with the representatives of the authorities over discrepancies and anomalies that appeared to have arisen. None of this is necessarily predicated upon the recent findings of the CoS in the Big Tax Case, but stands on its own.
Back in February 2014 The Scottish Football Monitor wrote to Harper MacLeod, the law firm that the SPL had engaged to gather evidence for the Lord Nimmo Smith (LNS) Commission investigating the full and proper registration of players paid by Rangers Football Club under Employee Benefit Trust (EBT) arrangements.
The initial set-up of the LNS Commission on 5th March 2012 by the SPL (View File) charged LNS with a look at EBTs from 1st July 1998 (when the SPL came into being).
In practice though, the Commission only looked at EBTs from 23 November 2000 onwards.
This change of date was based on the earliest side letter supplied by Duff and Phelps, although Harper MacLeod had requested ALL documentation from 1998 to March 2012 relating to ALL EBTs.
This prompted a series of letters to Harper MacLeod from The Scottish Football Monitor, although Harper MacLeod’s replies failed to address the issues raised.
The passage of time blurs memories but this archive is designed to remind readers of those blogs and correspondence, and the key points contained in them.
It also highlights the apparent inability or unwillingness on the part of the SPL and SFA to engage with us in any meaningful way.
NB: The SFA were informed of our correspondence by Harper MacLeod in October 2014.
It is extremely difficult to be concise in this situation. There are various strands of argument and details seemingly small, but vitally important – however the following is an attempt to make the material accessible and provides links to the relevant files in chronological order (links are in green).
- Item 1: The first SFM letter of 19th February 2014 to Harper MacLeod
- Item 2: The Annexes containing the documents apparently not supplied to Harper Macleod in the spring of 2012 along with other pertinent information about the testimony given to LNS during the Commission.
- Item 3: The SFM response of 29 March 2014 to Harper MacLeod’s reply to the first letter.
- Item 3.1: An SFM analysis of Harper MacLeod’s initial reply attached to response at 3.
- Item 4: An SFM blog of 5th September pointing out how the documents not supplied had a direct impact on the advice given to the SPL Board to accept The Decision of The LNS Commission.
- Item 5: The last letter of 4th October 2014 to Harper MacLeod answering points raised by them (see next) and thanking them for passing our correspondence to the SFA Compliance Officer who has so far deigned not to reply.
- Item 5.1: Harper MacLeod’s actual response to SFM 5th September letter.
- Item 6: An SFM Blog (Inc. a transcript of an interview between Alex Thomson and Stewart Regan).
- Item 6.1: Truncated version of above blog.
- Item 7: A clearer extract of key document from Item 2 Annexes
Having no locus to demand answers from the SPL or the SFA, all we can do is provide information – information that we believe presents a prima facie case that LNS was deeply flawed even before the latest developments in the Tax Case came to light. The challenge for us is this: what can we do about it?
It is clear from the meagre response we have received that the authorities are unwilling to engage with us, so it is fair to assume that further correspondence will be met with the same lack of response.
Are we merely a bunch of obsessed nut-jobs with our own take on the Flat Earth conspiracy? If that is the case, surely a few words of explanation to dispel our doubts would have had traction with the rest of the football public. Indeed the lack of any reply undoubtedly serves as confirmation of our belief that something may be seriously wrong.
The questions have been posed. The SFA appears to think that not answering them is a wise course of action. Given that anecdotal evidence presents a compelling case that the general football public are widely in agreement with us, are there any journalists out there who will take the time to look at what we have observed and what we seek clarification on?
There are undoubtedly inferences to be drawn from the evidence we have, and from the silence of the authorities.
The statement by Celtic on Friday 13th November is certainly a start in the process we wish to begin, but it only mentions the elephant in the room. It gives no clue about how it could be transported to another place.
In the first instance we at SFM seek only explanations, and despite the inferences mentioned earlier, we are still eager to be satisfied that rules were followed and justice done.
Is there really nobody in the MSM who has the courage to seek the answers we seek? I suspect not. What we do in the absence of that courage is important. We are at a crossroads. Either we give up on the game altogether and spend our Saturdays and Sundays doing other things – or we find a way to get these questions out of blog pages and into the mainstream.
We need an alliance of fans of all clubs to do that, and we will be looking to build that alliance. I would urge fans of all clubs to give this material to fan sites of their own clubs.
These are not just words. There can be no movement on this issue unless our reach is extended. SFM alone does not have the clout required to bring the clubs to the table or the MSM to fair and balanced reporting. We need that alliance of fans desperately. We don’t seek leadership of that alliance – but we are happy to provide it if required.
This is not a campaign to have Rangers punished. I understand that Rangers fans (since their club is in the middle of this mess) are reluctant to see us as anything other than a bunch of Rangers haters.
That is unequivocally not the case from the perspective of the moderators of this blog. SFM is committed to justice, and to the integrity of the sport we all love.
Justice is ON THE SIDE of Rangers and their fans – it does not conspire against them. A growing number of Rangers fans are coming round to our way of thinking and our tone must reflect that. This is not a Celtic or Hearts or Aberdeen or anybody else v Rangers issue. This is a fans v corrupt authorities issue.
We all deserve answers, and hopefully our alliance will compel each individual club to act in the interests of the fans .
As well as the tennis, Nothing to do with patronizing equality and everything to do with simply a damn good try, not being able (for able read allowed!) to make the fitba yesterday, an afternoons babysitting was enhanced massively by the women’s curling team going for European gold. Came up just short (the execution of two incredibly difficult shots to be precise) but terrific effort nonetheless.
Re RTC. I think the emails were sparked due to “subscriptions” to the blog site. This means that it was “published” briefly but taken down. There was a similar trigger to a very old draft post soon after the CoS appeal on the BTC was announced. RTC him/herself admitted changes to the wordpress console were the reason. I suspect its the same this time and the post was a draft prepared should there be no appeal. I think if no leave to appeal has been sought by close of Wednesday we may see a few new RTC blog posts.
@ Smugas 29th November 2015 at 4:51 pm
And the Scots women football team have just won their Euro Qualifier 10-0.
Does anybody know the res count yet?…
It got me thinking, if Mick ties up Res 10 in court, (and he has 21 days to do so) will the men with the £5m say “No £5m then?”………….That would not be a good enough excuse !
They can put the £5m in, on the same terms Mick did……Security over the assets.
Shares for equity, security over the assets for equity, What’s the difference?
Anybody would think that that would not be a very secure security….Or somethin’
Over the past few years with the ongoing issues with the Ibrox club the feeling across the football world in relation to all fans (outwith Govan) is for truth to prevail as we all want to know if the game has been fairly played or has there been an unfair advantage to one club. Now we have as a result of the Ibrox club several court cases coming up that may go in some way towards resolving some of these concerns. They are grave charges and as a result the cases are to be held in the High Court. Also what is the next step IF BDO do not appeal the HMRC case concerning the EBT’s? It is possibly not a pleasant thought for our SFA and the one club involved and it’s fans or our friends in the smsm.
Serious as it has been over the past few years there have been occasions that have brought a smile to my face, such as:
The person who gave the Tax advice concerning EBT’s and his new career.
The RFF cheques going to Mr Custard (tickled me for ages this one)
The fans march to an empty/closed Hampden
CW potential investor the Prince of Monaco
Incubator
CG Christmas message
Staged interview with Ally and JT
CG in the hospital bed
All of these events could take place in a pantomime and I could go on but these are actual factual events that took place at Ibrox and the thing is we are led to believe that Rangers are the establishment club, integrity is one of their main values, they are the fabric of our society and upholder of all traditions.
Really looking back they have not conducted themselves very well over the past few years but that is what they seem to do quite often.
As I say what next if BDO do not appeal, and it does result in all trophies won by that club being removed from the history books, how will their fans deal with that?
I have got to admit there have been some less serious moments during this saga.
valentinesclown 29th November 2015 at 6:20 pm.
“As I say what next if BDO do not appeal, and it does result in all trophies won by that club being removed from the history books, how will their fans deal with that?”
——————————————————————————————–
VC. There are two sides to that coin bud, I am more interested in how non-Sevco fans will react if a new inquiry is not launched.
Corrupt official 29th November 2015 at 6:40 pm #valentinesclown 29th November 2015 at 6:20 pm. “As I say what next if BDO do not appeal, and it does result in all trophies won by that club being removed from the history books, how will their fans deal with that?” ——————————————————————————————– VC. There are two sides to that coin bud, Iam more interested in how non-Sevco fans will react if a new inquiry is not launched.
——————————————————————————
Very badly.
Scottish Football needs a strong set of clubs now prepared to sort this problem out once and for all.
We obviously await news of any appeal on or prior to 2 December but in the absence of such we expect action from the clubs and football authorities.
This latest tweet from Rangers Taxcase is relevant to some earlier debate on here.
Rangers Tax-Case @rangerstaxcase 37m37 minutes agoFor the avoidance of doubt, I have no information on whether there will be an appeal of the Big Tax Case to The Supreme Court or not.
Corrupt official 29th November 2015 at 6:40 pm
I’m currently bidding my time in contacting my club as any appeal will kick a decision on a new enquiry down the road some way. I’m sure the people running, or pretending to run, our sport are praying for an appeal.
However I have already drafted an email which will be sent to my club if the deadline passes and there is no appeal. In that email I will simply point out that the thousands of pounds that I have spent watching , supposedly, sport was wasted. I point out that I have the feeling that I’m being conned not only be the SPL/SPFL and the SFA but also my own club. I will end simple by saying if there is no knew enquiry external of the SPFL and SFA then I’m out. That it should come to the point where very few fans have next to no faith in the governing bodies you know there is something far wrong.
It is time for us all to stop pretending here; Our sport is led by cowards who are incapable of shaking off the shackles of the past and bringing our sport into the 21st century. They are wedded to a freak show of two clubs, viewing that as the only way to sell their product. If that is the breadth of their vision then they should go and go immediately. For them to have briefed the media saying that the inquiry has already been held and the verdict given actually makes matters worse. This goes to the very heart of everything that is wrong with our sport. People are asked for documents, which they withhold to ensure they are not given the heaviest punishment. Parameters for the inquiry are limited to ensure that the SFA President who signed the first DOS EBT is not implicated. A club is allowed to investigate itself knowing that if it finds itself guilty then it will be expelled from association football and surprise, surprise there is no link found. AND WE ARE SUPPOSED TO SWALLOW THIS!!!
In the name of sanity get real. Stop shovelling crap and expecting us to swallow it. Those days, of secrecy and closed door deals, are done or they will be for the majority of fans because we will not attend.
Likewise the media are simply not up to the job. The make no statements one way or another on any number of issues and yet are insistent that their should be no reversal of results due to incomplete registration. This is even when some of them admit that there is a case to answer. What a ridiculous stance to take. They cannot bring themselves to use the ‘L’ word in that long running lie. They are a parody of a free and independent press. They are without honour or trust just like the people who run the sport.
Finally the clubs themselves are to blame. This issue should have been laid to rest long ago. From the point Charles Green was allowed to claim he had ‘bought the history’ the ball was on the slates. At that point there should have been a vote of no confidence called for against the entire SFA board. The reason the great lie has been allowed to be repeated is because of the individuals at Hampden, one who was at the birth of this scandal and implicated in it, decided to look after one club and through everyone else on the bonfire. He recruited an individual clearly lacking in any form of leadership, that could be finessed and moulded in his likeness, to ensure that this scandal would not see the light of day.
Yes the clubs are to blame!
They have, as a group, kept quiet and allowed this situation to drag the sport into the dirt. By saying nothing they have appeared complicit in everything that has gone on.
As the clock ticks down to appeal deadline day, if there is none and the clubs remain silent, then any thought of fair football in this country has gone.
At that point I’m out and I’ll find something else to do at the weekend.
justshatered 29th November 2015 at 8:01 pm
Your words, my thoughts exactly. An extra TU bud.
What I’ve never understood about an appeal of the CoS decision is why BDO would be interested in an appeal at all. Surely it does not matter to them who the creditors are, and should not deter them in securing as much for those creditors as they can. Perhaps those who have more knowledge of such matters can enlighten me.
My personal view is the notion of an appeal is something for people to cling to who simply don’t want to face up to the finality that Rangers were guilty of withholding tax on earnings they had guaranteed to some employees. It has been noticeable how many members of the media have repeatedly insisted BDO will appeal. I guess they would rather do that than try and convince us Rangers did not gain any sporting advantage.
“Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed: everything else is public relations.” (George Orwell)
Now then, how many of those employed by the scottish press deserve to be regarded as members of the former profession…??
upthehoops 29th November 2015 at 8:21 pm
I don’t know if BDO can appeal.
I think part of the original sale to Craig Whyte was that the Murray Group remained in control of the EBT case. Remember RFC were only a small part of the overall challenge that HMRC had made as a lot of the cases were against other parts of the various businesses that David Murray owned.
Now I believe that the Murray Group are also in difficulties so they may attempt to stave off this bill by appealing. This brings me back to this time last year when the Murray Group released their latest financial results; some in our media were even suggesting that David Murray may enter the stage again despite the report telling them that they could not even cover their pension liabilities and that the “Groups operations were coming to an end”. What is it that our media cannot grasp in such a phrase?
How, or if, the original deal has been affected by the subsequent Liquidation of the club I don’t know however it is typical of our media; clueless whether BDO can appeal and unable to back it up with reasoned debate. They just guess what outcome will be best for RFC/’The Rangers’ and then write a story to justify it. They are shameless, clueless, and spineless.
justshatered 29th November 2015 at 8:01 pm
‘..Yes the clubs are to blame!They have, as a group, kept quiet .’
________
That is very true. There is little doubt that after some spirited-enough opposition to the bullying, hectoring, fork-tongued CEOs of the three ‘authorities’ to deny the new club a place in anything but the bottom division, the 41 clubs seem to have given up the ghost.
This was probably because all the emphasis was put on whether SDM’s rotten club had cheated the taxman, rather than on the fact that he had cheated all of them by not disclosing what he was paying his players. The cry was “EBTs were legit” not “you lied to the SFA and SPL about the payments your players were getting”.
There were, of course, other reasons- perhaps partisan support for the ‘mother club’, fear of social ostracisation, fear of violence, fear of drawing unwelcome attention to themselves,a reluctance to accept that SDM could have been such a cad, fear of the ramifications if it was acknowledged that the very administration of the game had probably been corrupt for a decade and more….
All of these reasons will have to faced up to and bravely tackled when 5th December dawns without there having been an Appeal lodged to the Supreme Court.
On that day, the assorted Chairmen, CEOs, and owners/operators of our clubs will not be able to shelter behind the issue of whether EBTs might have been properly used by that d..nable knight.
And stand up for themselves and for the Integrity of OUR sport, and the integrity of their businesses as part of Sport.
Mr McCrae has a power of work to do. Like Hercules cleaning the Augean stables, he has a mountain of the stuff to clear from the 6th Floor and environs.
Let him start on 5th December, knowing that the supporters of 41 clubs will support him in doing the right things, namely, strip away the unearned titles etc, and amend the record books.For starters.
Justshattered at 8 01 best post I have read on here in many a month BRILLIANT
JustShattered.
BDO representing the creditors of RFC(IL) were the only opposition to HMRC’s appeal at the CoS. As you correctly pointed out MIH has recently hit the buffers and their administrators did not continue the MIH actions at the First and Upper Tier Tribunals. You also correctly pointed out that RFC let MIH lead at those first tribunals (the timeline evades me at present were they (IA) or (IL) at the time of the Upper).
I’m not sure who can seek leave to appeal but BDO would definitely be one. The Insolvency Practitioners in charge of the reamains of MIH are probably another. Given the judgement is against the companies which the judgement now says should have deducted PAYE and NIC (ees) from the EBT receipients as well as paying NIC(ers) I think that is the limit of those that could seek leave. Of course there are plenty hoping there will be an appeal which includes many EBT advisors and probably many of the officeholders at Hampden and a knight of the realm who may soon be defrocked
tykebhoy 29th November 2015 at 9:27 pm
Thanks very much for the update.
I was unaware that MIH had not taken up the last appeal.
Everyday is a school day as they say.
John Clark,
“There were, of course, other reasons- perhaps partisan support for the ‘mother club’. “
Couldn’t believe how ironic that was. I was drinking with a Motherwell supporter yesterday, amongst others, and I asked him ‘who are you playing this weekend?’ and he said Hearts. You know the wee brothers versus the cousins! I nearly spilled my drink laughing.
jimbo 29th November 2015 at 11:10 pm
‘..You know the wee brothers versus the cousins!..’
_______
I was thinking not so much about the general run of supporters of clubs ( I suppose lots of people have ‘second’ teams’: no harm in that) but more of the occasional club director whose allegiances might be divided!
So on the 5th December I can hum “On the first day of Christmas BDO gave to me no appeal on an EBT”
Even if there is an application to be permit an appeal and that is accepted the law as it stands now is that payments for playing football were hidden and then denied or hidden and accepted as income, in the DOS cases.
So now is the time to crank up the abacus for all those 0-3 results and the outcomes derived from them. That is what has been done when there were technical and inadvertent breaches of rules what could be termed with no sub text as honest mistakes.
The deceit practiced by the former club should also be the subject of punishments even though it is now dead even though they can be no more than symbolic.
None of the above has anything to do with the current club using Ibrox Stadium and their views on the actions which should come are no more or less significant than those of any other club.
They are distancing them selves from the financial aspects of the liquidation and cannot be allowed to involve themselves with any other aspect just because it confirms to the myth which they are selling to those who want to deny reality.
There have been admissions that the EBT scheme was done for sporting advantage by those who perpetrated those actions. During one of his appearances in relation to his development Donald Trump was asked for evidence his reply was that “I am the evidence” There are actors here who are close to the same position
0-3 for an EBT
Bravo Justshattered @ 8.01 …A copy of your post should be sent to ALL clubs just incase they think doing nothing about this stinking scandal is OK . I too buddy am like you, Im out for good if this is not sorted once and for all
justshatered 29th November 2015 at 8:46 pm #
I remember this from a copy of the Share purchase agreement here.
http://rangerstaxcase.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/index-spa.pdf
http://rangerstaxcase.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/docs-2.pdf
http://rangerstaxcase.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/docs-3.pdf
http://rangerstaxcase.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/docs-6789.pdf
http://rangerstaxcase.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/workingcapitalfacility.pdf
The talk of there being no rules to justify investigating fully what RFC got up to from 1999 to 2014 had me searching my memory and SFA Articles. This is from the 2014/15 version but it is much the same in previous years.
I’m copying here for reference. Somewhere in there a rule or whole Article appears to have been breached.
Article 5
Obligations; and Duties of Members
5.1 All members shall:(a) observe the principles of loyalty, integrity and sportsmanship in accordance with the rules of fair play; (b) be subject to and shall comply with: (i) these Articles; (ii) the Judicial Panel Protocol; (iii) the Challenge Cup Competition Rules; (iv) the Registration Procedures;
ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION (v) International Match Calendar; (vi) Club Licensing Procedures; and (vii) any statutes, regulations, directives, codes, decisions promulgated by the Board, the Professional Game Board, the Non-Professional Game Board, the Judicial Panel, a Committee or sub-committee, FIFA, UEFA or the Court of Arbitration for Sport;(c) recognise and submit to the jurisdiction of the Court of Arbitration for Sport as specified in the relevant provisions of the FIFA Statutes and the UEFA Statutes; (d) respect the Laws of the Game; (e) refrain from engaging in any activity, practice or conduct which would constitute an offence under sections 1, 2 or 6 of the Bribery Act 2010; and(f) behave towards the Scottish FA and other members with the utmost good faith.5.2 Each member shall procure that its officials, its Team Officials and its players, and shall use its best endeavours to procure that its Team Staff, its employees, its Team Scout(s) (other than its officials, its Team Officials or players):(a) observe the principles of loyalty, integrity and sportsmanship in accordance with the rules of fair play;(b) observe, submit to and comply with these Articles and the statutes, regulations;(c) be subject to and shall comply with: (i) these Articles; (ii) the Judicial Panel Protocol; (iii) the Challenge Cup Competition Rules; (iv) the Registration Procedures; (v) International Match Calendar; (vi) Club Licensing Procedures; and (vii) any statutes, regulations, directives, codes, decisions promulgated by the Board, the Professional Game Board, the Non-Professional Game Board, the Judicial Panel, a Committee or sub-committee, FIFA, UEFA or the Court of Arbitration for Sport;(d) recognise and submit to the jurisdiction of the Court of Arbitration for Sport as specified in the provisions of the FIFA Statutes and the UEFA Statutes; (e) observe the Laws of the Game; and (f) refrain from engaging in any activity, practice or conduct which would constitute an offence under sections 1, 2 or 6 of the Bribery Act 2010.
ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION5.3 Each member shall procure that each of its Team Officials, and/or each member of Team Staff, as the case may be, completes, signs and submits to the Scottish FA the Team Official/Team Staff Form prior to taking up his post. Until a completed Team Official/Team Staff Form has been submitted to the Scottish FA, the Team Official, and/or each member of Team Staff, as the case may be, in question will not be eligible to gain access to the technical area at any match involving the club by which he has been appointed.5.4 Each member shall procure that each of its Team Scouts completes, signs and submits to the Scottish FA the Team Scout Form prior to the taking up of his post.5.5 Each member shall ensure that it advises its officials, Team Officials, its Team Staff, Team Scout and its employees of all amendments to the Articles from time to time.5.6 Each member hereby authorises the Scottish FA to communicate, engage and be the recipient of information, as the Scottish FA deems appropriate, with such governmental agencies (including but not limited to HM Revenue and Customs) in respect of the financial affairs and operations of such member, subject to a duty of confidentiality to the member.
So as the CoS appeal deadline draws nearer I guess the media will be drafting articles lecturing us all we need to move on ‘for the good of Scottish football’. Why are things that are actually only good for Rangers always portrayed as good for the wider game?
Well, the banks and the solicitors’ offices are all open for business now, so we can expect to hear shortly that Ashley has received the money due to him, and that Ashley’s lawyers have cancelled all his securities, and transferred the RR shares and the IP back to TRFC.
Dave King is proposing to just repay the man his £5m without trying to extract a few concessions from him. We should find out this week. I can’t imagine Ashley keeping quiet if this loan repayment turns out to be not so straightforward after all.
Or maybe not. Am I the only one who thinks that it won’t be quite that simple?
I have to wonder whether the same lawyers who cunningly slipped a 7 year notice clause into the retail deal, will have drawn up a favourable (to Ashley) loan agreement which was as easy as that to get out of.
I also wonder whether straight talking
I commend Level Sinko/Keith Jackson for today’s piece in the DR: it can’t be easy to write such satire.
And by the way; it’s ‘consigliere’ , not that made-up word you’ve used. You could have asked SuperAlly, he’s (supposedly still) pals with Bobby Duvall, who played Tom Hagen in The Godfather.
The West Lothian Question
——————————–
Is it right that Livingston FC had to pay their breach of rules fine because thay didnt have an ‘ old club’ to pass the fine onto whilst TRFC havent had to pay their breach of rules fine because they did have an ‘ old club’ to fine ?
on the subject of LNS ‘ amazing’ decision to fine the old club, DCK states he raised £5m in an hour from ‘RRM’ thats £250k every 3 mins, why didnt he add 3 mins injury time and pay the LNS fine ?….. maybe its been ‘collected’ and its been missed or not mentioned……
Jingso.Jimsie 30th November 2015 at 10:55 am # I commend Level Sinko/Keith Jackson for today’s piece in the DR: it can’t be easy to write such satire.
And by the way; it’s ‘consigliere’ , not that made-up word you’ve used. You could have asked SuperAlly, he’s (supposedly still) pals with Bobby Duvall, who played Tom Hagen in The Godfather.
___________________________
That’s quite a lengthy article from Jackson, yet it contains only one piece of ‘news’, ie something not revealed previously (as far as I’m aware). That is that last week Ashley ‘demanded the return of a £5m crisis loan’! As usual, there is no indication of where this information came from, and it is just thrown into the article as if of no real importance. As though he (Level5) hope it is not questioned or even noticed, but those they want to ‘inform’ have it entered into their WATP minds. No need for further explanation, it’s all big bad Mike!
I was somewhat bemused by King’s lack of explanation over the board’s U-turn over the loan repayment at the AGM, and surely, if it was sparked by a fresh demand for repayment, it would have been reasonable to say so (and obviously not prevented by ‘confidentiality’ as Jackson’s revelation shows).
Is it just the case that King wants that information put out there stealthily, and unofficially (perhaps didn’t dare say it at the AGM), because it’s not quite what happened?
I’d love to see Jackson try to justify stating the following, of King:
‘That said, he has spent in excess of £8m on shares and loans since pulling up a seat at the table a year ago.’
Could he have thrown this total fallacy in to highlight just how ridiculous this Level5 PR puff piece is? Surely even he couldn’t be so naïve as to believe what he’s written, could he?
Allyjambo 30th November 2015 at 1:17 pm #
————————————————-
King pretty well confirms that SD requested the £5M back in the RTV interview he did following the AGM. He is asked if SD was aware that that the club was willing to repay the loan.
http://rangers.co.uk/news/rangers-tv/video-chairman-interview/
Listen from 2’50” in – King responds:
… and from 3’30”
From twitter.
Rangers FC @RangersFC 19h19 hours ago Kenny Miller insists the @Petrofac_Cup Final will be as big as any other final he’s played: http://rng.rs/1lo8lwi
If any Hearts player had said that last season, I’d have died from embarrassment! Surely no club that has spent 140 years of it’s life in the top tier would ever put up with it’s players being proud to win a cup no top club would ever want to take part in. Surely it would rather die first!
Allyjambo 30th November 2015 at 1:48 pm #
AJ, as I believe Rangers* probably will beat Peterhead and win the Petrofac (at the fourth time of asking!), yours is an argument I’m already readying for when my Rangers* supporting friends go on to crow about it.
I see that crowing very much as proof that they’re NOT the same club. I know for a fact that the fans of the old Rangers would never want to be seen crowing about winning that competition!
Well
If MA did in fact request repayment of his £5m loan and not the other way around then maybe he is trying to lure them into court for some issue related to the loan contract. Otherwise there is little point in him making life easier for DCK by returning the IP securities and being given formal notice that the 7 yr SD contract will be terminated.
Also
Since the potential lenders are to be given new equity shares in exchange for their loans, the £5m repayment offer is dependent on Ashley agreeing to be diluted by supporting the issue of new shares. MAs current position is to take legal action opposing issue of new shares That would delay a decision for months
IMO
The most likely scenario
Departure of DCK and other Directors followed by a cash crisis causes the remaining Board to apply for Admin/Liquidation
Administration gives ownership of IP to MA. This makes him the Kingmaker for anyone offering a CVA or buying the assets who wants to use the IP
Allyjambo 30th November 2015 at 1:17 pm
‘…..Surely even he couldn’t be so naïve as to believe what he’s written, could he?’
_______
He is not naive, of course. There’s nothing wide-eyed and innocent about oor Keef.
Which makes him worthy of a place in whichever circle that Dante decided to put such as he and his likes into to.
easyJambo 30th November 2015 at 1:32 pm
EJ,
I’ve listened to the interview (thanks for the link), for first time just now, and at no time in the first 5 /6 minutes (I stopped listening to the flim flam) does he say Ashley has asked, demanded or anything else, for the money back within the past week (he doesn’t mention any previous request either). In fact, he goes to great length to make out that the board has come to this decision by itself as the way forward for the business and is in the best interests of the supporters.
I certainly don’t get the impression that a fresh demand for repayment has been made in the last week from anything King says in that interview (unless he says it later), unless, of course, because it’s King, the opposite of what he says is most likely to be true!
I wouldn’t be surprised if Ashley has demanded his money back (with menaces
) but I have yet to hear, or read, anything from King, or any other board member, to confirm this.
Quite an amazing moment, after just 20 seconds, where King says he didn’t think the loan should be repaid as he saw it as some kind of compensation for ‘some of the historical negative cash flows’! If there has been one man not responsible for ‘negative cash flows’ in the whole history of TRFC, it’s Mike Ashley, the man due this £5m. And no one has been more responsible for ‘negative cash flow’, than Dave King (ST boycotts) himself. Even more amazing is that King said it as though he genuinely believes it! That fits in so well with some of the descriptions of a sociopath put on here and elsewhere.
Any word on the RIFC AGM resolution voting results? I can’t even think that there’s been any rumours put out on social media! That not a tad unusual? I’d suggest one or two important ones must be a bit tight, or not tight enough
ianagain 28th November 2015 at 8:57 pm #”Should we perchance revive the SFM Southern branch meeting on the 9th of the next month whereon myself and other(s) and maybees ? James D hurl up at yon HC of Justice to witness the next instalment in this farce? A small soiree afterwards a kind of SFM pre Christmas party. Whether DCK chooses to join us might be up to the judge though.”
There’s a decent-sized boozer right next to the Law Courts, called the “Old Bank of England” – there’s an irony in that. If this drink is a goer I’ll pop along too, though after working hours.. What’s a quorum for this sort of thing? Ach even if it’s not an official SFM I’m up for it.
I don’t think we should be too critical of The Petrofac Cup, every competition has it’s level, as does every team. Any team that takes part in a specific competition should do it’s best to win and be proud of it, if they go on to lift the cup.
Kenny Miller is talking rubbish (IMO) as you cannot compare a top flight team playing in and winning the top competition with the same team (if he believes them to the same team) playing in a lower graded competition. He is simply playing to the gallery.
Irrelevant of the stupidity of Millers comments, he is playing up the competition and that cannot be a bad thing. We should not play down the competition and we definitely should not imply to Peterhead that it’s not worthwhile showing up, this is a massive day for them.
Totally agree.
But how about a 3.5 year old club that’s never been in the top flight and never won any cup?
I think it has long been accepted that there are Rangers Men out there who have a bit of dosh in their pockets. (Why they didn’t come forward when ‘the club’ most needed them is another story but still a pertinent question)
Nothing wrong with that or having them put their hand in their pockets to assist their chosen football club. Many others are doing the same at clubs across the country.
Apart from all the ‘previous re the EBTS’ I get the main feeling that the concern from fans of other clubs is that the hubris and current actions appear to be history repeating itself.
We basically have a loss making business unable to get by without regular cash injections. No problems there (other than the regularity and short intervals between each ‘loan’) as others are or have recently, prior to resolving years of financial management, taken the same action.
To me the issue is that despite the previous talk of ‘Openness and Transparency’ the message being put out to all is Champions League etc as opposed to a more measured and realistic tone.
I am all for talking our game up but their is times you need to calm the beans.
Folks in the media are screaming to high heaven about how are Celtic meant to attract the required calibre of players required for European success to Glasgow but it is taken as read that these same types of players are going to say ‘Oh it has to be Ibrox for me’
If someone like Douglas Park was at the helm, talking of a slow rebuilding exercise with the aim of getting a team out that can be competitive as soon as possible within a sustainable financial model then I doubt many would be so riled as they are with the current nonsense in terms of statements and support from certain quarters of the press.
On the surface it looks as clear as day that there is no long term plan or strategy in terms of financial management. Very little has been said about getting real fan involvement in the ownership side of things but it seems plenty has to be said about taking the suckers cash from them.
Clearly they are making no progress with Ashley whatsoever with regard to renegotiating the retail deal. No real movement re share issues and no further forward with any investment that is not being gobbled up simply by keeping the lights on.
The talk of a future share issue with a view to bringing in other investors must, given the experience of Ashley, Easdale, Margherita etc is just madness given you may not know who you are letting through the door and what mayhem they may wish to cause in the future. The public flotation route must surely be the least appealing unless there is a real sugar daddy out their.
The way forward for T’Rangers is a solid rebuilding job and the message to the fans should be that the board requires your patience, perseverance and whatever you can do to support the club though this period. Given all they have been through surely there are enough to see the sense in this approach.
While King and all his baggage is on board this is just going to be a farce not only for the club but the rest of Scottish Football.
Madbhoy24941 30th November 2015 at 2:45 pm # I don’t think we should be too critical of The Petrofac Cup, every competition has it’s level, as does every team. Any team that takes part in a specific competition should do it’s best to win and be proud of it, if they go on to lift the cup. Kenny Miller is talking rubbish (IMO) as you cannot compare a top flight team playing in and winning the top competition with the same team (if he believes them to the same team) playing in a lower graded competition. He is simply playing to the gallery. Irrelevant of the stupidity of Millers comments, he is playing up the competition and that cannot be a bad thing. We should not play down the competition and we definitely should not imply to Peterhead that it’s not worthwhile showing up, this is a massive day for them.
__________________________
I agree with you that the competition should be respected, and I apologise if my post suggested I don’t (but to be in it, Hearts had to be relegated, as did Hibs, and I’m sure the fans of both these clubs would rather not be in the position that qualifies them to play in it). It is the circumstances that lead to a ‘big’ club playing in the Petrofac Cup that make it embarrassing, not the competition itself.
What’s more, Kenny Miller played for the most arrogant club, with the most arrogant supporters, in Scotland, it is inconceivable that they could ever not be embarrassed to qualify for such a competition, and they never did!
With all the money spent on PR firms, both TRFC’s and the tournament organizers, I’m sure someone could come up with a better promotion piece than something that is so blatantly a lie (unless Kenny Miller has never played in a ‘bigger cup’ final before)!
Allyjambo 30th November 2015 at 1:17 pm
That’s quite a lengthy article from Jackson…
=============================
There’s a couple of things in the article that are a bit strange (well, to me, anyway!).
KJ seems to repeat some of the confidential information that sees King in court next week, as did Gary Ralston on Saturday.
He also rather traduces David Somers,who is still active in the City, holding several NEDships.
No lawyers on duty at the Record over the weekend?
BDO have appealed
can kicked down the road for a while
BDO have sought Leave to appeal. Anybody know what dates we should be scrawling on our new SFM calendars. A week, A month, ???? Surely a refusal won’t take long.
https://twitter.com/RichwilBBC/status/671345708084150272
@AndyGraham slightly pedantic but the can may not be kicked that much further down the road. BDO have sought leave from the CoS to appeal to the Supreme Court. CoS could reject that leave especially if they believe it vexatious. Although, if it happens, the rejection could be appealed too.
I’m sure I read somewhere that the results of the resolutions voted on at the Rangers AGM would be available later that same day.
Is it normal for it to drag on so long?
Quoted from Keith Jackson in the Daily Record.
On a par with “off the radar” in my opinion. Just pathetic from a national newpaper, even one on its way out.
Allyjambo 30th November 2015 at 2:32 pm
“Any word on the RIFC AGM resolution voting results? I can’t even think that there’s been any rumours put out on social media! That not a tad unusual? I’d suggest one or two important ones must be a bit tight, or not tight enough”
I heard it was 74% for disapplication 26% against. The Rangers have asked the SFA if Sandy Bryson can run his eye over the voting papers for any “irregularities”…..
Re Confidentiality Clause.
I could be wrong but this clause only relates to the Rangers Retail Limited agreement/contract between TRFC and MA.
So a couple of points.
Ralston and Jackson are only repeating what is already in the public domain. You can’t get the cat back in the bag so only the original revelations are a breach of the agreement and gagging order. The gagging order was to prevent further detail being leaked although it may have extended to RIFC’s officers themselves not repeating the revelations to refresh memories.
It is reported that “deadpan” rather than “tongue in cheek” DCK stated at the AGM that he couldn’t say if SD/MA had been informed that the board had agreed the £5m loan repayment citing the gagging order as to why he couldn’t say. While some of the T&Cs of the loan related to RRL the loan itself is not subject to the gagging order. It appears DCK and RIFC now have a get out of jail free card if they are asked awkward questions. Not that our compliant MSM are ever likely to ask awkward questions
Jingso.Jimsie 30th November 2015 at 3:04 pm
Must admit the thought of defamation came across mind when seeing the doing Somers got from Keef.
However on looking for a definition of defamation in terms of Scots Law I found the following:
In Scots Law, an offending statement may not necessarily be defamatory as it may fall into another category of hurtful words, such as being a malicious falsehood or a slander of title. To be defamatory a statement must be false and must lower the defamed in the estimation of right thinking members of society.
Therefore right thinking Bears may be justified in having a low estimation of Somers’ abilities as a football club chairman, in the same way most right thinking football fans have a very low opinion of Jackson as a serious contributor to sports journalism.
Allyjambo 30th November 2015 at 2:25 pm #
easyJambo 30th November 2015 at 1:32 pm
EJ,
I’ve listened to the interview (thanks for the link), for first time just now, and at no time in the first 5 /6 minutes (I stopped listening to the flim flam) does he say Ashley has asked, demanded or anything else, for the money back within the past week (he doesn’t mention any previous request either). In fact, he goes to great length to make out that the board has come to this decision by itself as the way forward for the business and is in the best interests of the supporters.
===============================
AJ – Note that he was asked if SD was aware of a willingness to repay the loan.
The two short transcripts I posted earlier, confirm 1) that SD were anticipating the Board’s decision, and 2) the decision to pay only evolved over the previous week.
Now if the Board did come to this decision at their own volition, then why would SD be anticipating anything, and why would such a volte face decision be formulated over the week prior to the AGM and confirmed with a round of phone calls on the morning of the AGM itself.
I think that the only reasonable interpretation you can place on SD’s knowledge, expectation and the timing of the decision, is that SD knew about it because they had formally asked for the money back a week or so before the AGM
In relation to Rangers I suspect the reason that they didn’t come forward, either when SDM was selling or during administration, was the realisation that the sum of money required to revive the original club was prohibitive. Whether any RRM had sufficient funds to do it we don’t know, but it became clear that no one was willing to front the £100m+ investment that would have been required.
As regards Sevco, the web of issues and characters involved must make the investment required too risky. Even shed of the liabilities of the predecessor club, Sevco still probably requires a £50m investment to clear debts, fund the required investment in playing resources and carry out required stadium improvements. A hell of a risky investment to make when so many factors remain out of their control.
James Doleman @jamesdoleman 21m21 minutes ago
Of 49 Scottish submissions to appeal to the Supreme Court in last 6 years, 3 were accepted.
==================================
That’s quite a startlingly low figure.
Jingso.Jimsie 30th November 2015 at 3:04 pm # Allyjambo 30th November 2015 at 1:17 pm That’s quite a lengthy article from Jackson…=============================
There’s a couple of things in the article that are a bit strange (well, to me, anyway!).
KJ seems to repeat some of the confidential information that sees King in court next week, as did Gary Ralston on Saturday.
He also rather traduces David Somers,who is still active in the City, holding several NEDships.
No lawyers on duty at the Record over the weekend?
___________________________
Jackson does seem to lay it on heavy to Somers, but whether actionable, or not, I don’t know. It certainly seems to strike at his professionalism, though it’s doubtful anyone in the City reads the DR, so defamation might be hard to prove.
It could only happen in Scotland, that a newspaper would slaughter a businessman of no known illegal dealings, while, in the same article, making a convicted criminal, with cases pending, appear whiter than Whyte
I wonder if Jackson could tell us how many lies he knows Somers told the club’s supporters, how many personal promises went unfulfilled, and compare that with the record of his current puppetmaster, King!
easyJambo 30th November 2015 at 4:19 pm # Allyjambo 30th November 2015 at 2:25 pm # easyJambo 30th November 2015 at 1:32 pm EJ, I’ve listened to the interview (thanks for the link), for first time just now, and at no time in the first 5 /6 minutes (I stopped listening to the flim flam) does he say Ashley has asked, demanded or anything else, for the money back within the past week (he doesn’t mention any previous request either). In fact, he goes to great length to make out that the board has come to this decision by itself as the way forward for the business and is in the best interests of the supporters. =============================== AJ – Note that he was asked if SD was aware of a willingness to repay the loan.
The two short transcripts I posted earlier, confirm 1) that SD were anticipating the Board’s decision, and 2) the decision to pay only evolved over the previous week.
Now if the Board did come to this decision at their own volition, then why would SD be anticipating anything, and why would such a volte face decision be formulated over the week prior to the AGM and confirmed with a round of phone calls on the morning of the AGM itself.
I think that the only reasonable interpretation you can place on SD’s knowledge, expectation and the timing of the decision, is that SD knew about it because they had formally asked for the money back a week or so before the AGM
________________________
EJ,
I’m not saying MA didn’t demand his money back, just that no one from TRFC has actually confirmed this, yet Jackson has included it in his piece in a manner that suggests it’s already established that it was.
In my opinion, in the video, King is making great efforts to give the impression it was a decision reached by the board alone, with no outside pressure. I do not believe that; there will be much more behind such a reversal than a change of heart, and, if Ashley merely ‘demanded’ the money back, then what’s changed this time round? (rhetorical question
) This, of course, could be no more than the rest of the board telling him not to be such an idiot!
I don’t think Ashley would have had to have asked for his money back to be in the know about the decision, it could have been leaked, deliberately or otherwise, to him, or King could have been ‘mistaken’ in thinking Ashley had a ‘sense’ that it was happening.
In any event, my point is not that Ashley hasn’t demanded his money back, but that, without the board definitively saying he has, it has been put into the public domain in a way that attaches no accountability to the board should it be inaccurate, or missing some important detail! Perhaps detail that is bigger news than the demand itself.
tykebhoy 30th November 2015 at 3:47 pm #Re Confidentiality Clause.I could be wrong but this clause only relates to the Rangers Retail Limited agreement/contract between TRFC and MA…
…Ralston and Jackson are only repeating what is already in the public domain…
======================================
Ralston’s article on Saturday states that the DR has ‘accessed’ papers that James Blair, Company Secretary of RIFC, has lodged with the court regarding previously unknown aspects of the confidentiality agreement, so not in the public domain.
Ralston also states (for clarity, presumably) that the DR’s source wasn’t ‘Rangers’.
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-claim-knew-nothing-confidentiality-6915178
easyJambo 30th November 2015 at 4:28 pm # James Doleman @jamesdoleman 21m21 minutes ago Of 49 Scottish submissions to appeal to the Supreme Court in last 6 years, 3 were accepted. ================================== That’s quite a startlingly low figure.
___________________
I wonder what effect a failed (in the event) ‘leave to appeal’ submission might have on the value of a legal ‘precedent’, particularly as the submission will amount, I’m sure, to a review of the appeal judgement itself, or, at least, those parts on which the further appeal is based. Might tie up a few loose ends for HMRC.
Still, whatever happens next, at least Regan and Doncaster can have a better Christmas than they might otherwise have had
Allyjambo 30th November 2015 at 4:55 pm #
————————————————-
Thanks for clarifying your thoughts. I had initially misinterpreted what you had said, as suggesting Ashley hadn’t asked for his money back, rather than engineering a position of plausible deniability with what is actually on the record.
tykebhoy 30th November 2015 at 3:32 pm @AndyGraham slightly pedantic but the can may not be kicked that much further down the road. BDO have sought leave from the CoS to appeal to the Supreme Court. CoS could reject that leave especially if they believe it vexatious. Although, if it happens, the rejection could be appealed too.
===========================
tykebhoy, BDO seem to have handled this business in a professional manner, do you think they’d really go back to the Court of Session with vexatious request to appeal? The apparently logic-defying FTT decision through to the move away from legal semantics, common sense CoS ruling suggests that anything can happen. I wouldn’t risk betting £1 of David Murray’s money on what the outcome might be.
Three simple (as if) questions to all clubs.
1/ Financially speaking how much scrutiny do you place on the view that once ‘the brand’ is back (sorry JC) we’ll all feel the better-off for it? Genuine demonstrable analysis or just that you were told that it would be so, that there was, FROM YOUR OWN CLUBS VIEWPOINT no other way?
2/ Their successful return (sorry JC) automatically implies winners and losers. On the simple 11 vs 11 argument (ie. ignoring relative scale, ST numbers etc) they have to win to achieve their ambitious targets ergo your club has to lose. I’m sure plucky losers will make for all round entertainment, but there’s a definite recruitment drive for losers none the less. I’m assuming an RFC considered by them strong enough to compete with CFC implies this but is that maybe too severe? Will CFC’s relative decline (from over the horizon to visible in the distance) continue and be allowed to continue? Will RFC’s support accept being Arsenal? Or Newcastle even?
Accepting this fact, how do you intend to market YOUR club to existing and future potential season ticket holders? Interestingly Hearts return (and it is a return eh JC
) to relative strength could not, I don’t think, be argued to have negatively impacted on other clubs’ sales so is the RFC situation just an extension of that principle or is their something more deep rooted to be considered?
Alternatively of course, there is a theory that Doncaster is counting on that the reinstatement, (however false JC) of old rivalries will reinvigorate an otherwise stagnant product. In fact he’s more than counting on it, he appears to have bet the house, our house, on it.
3/ What if their success isn’t achieved. What if your club dares to continue to be the winner? Can it be sustained or will economic reality kick in at some point? And it will be established economic reality of course, since we have now had our eyes opened, we’ve been telt, that any other reality will simply not be tolerated by one large set of supporters, nor indeed considered by the games lazy authorities. Its aye been? Yes, but notice the tense! How confident are you therefore that the returning ethereal entity thingy will accept anything below 2nd with good grace? I don’t mean petted lip, I don’t even mean Manchester style ‘demonstrations of culture’ I mean a blatant, deliberate, assisted return to picking and choosing which rules they feel should apply to them, safe in the knowledge that downside risk, from financial impact to brand damage is minimised?
————–
I think that’s my email to my club just about finished!
easyJambo 30th November 2015 at 4:28 pm #
“James Doleman @jamesdoleman 21m21 minutes agoOf 49 Scottish submissions to appeal to the Supreme Court in last 6 years, 3 were accepted. _____
That’s quite a startlingly low figure.
________________-
I spent a bit of time trying to find out what percentage of applications to the Court of Session for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court were successful.
But the system changed as recently as September last, and this is all that I could discover:
http://www.gov.scot/Resource/0048/00489564.pdf
Scroll down to page 11
“As of 22 September 2015, the current provisions will be replaced by leave to appeal, only with permission of the Inner House or, failing such permission, with the permission of the UK Supreme Court.Statistics on appeals from the Court of Session to the UK Supreme Court are not published by the Scottish Government.”
I wonder why that is?
John Clark 30th November 2015 at 5:38 pm #
=============================
From JJ’s latest blog
https://johnjamessite.wordpress.com/2015/11/30/leave-to-appeal/
The figures don’t match up with James Doleman’s because the years are different, but at least they give an indication of what to expect.
Jingso.Jimsie 30th November 2015 at 5:04 pm # Ralston’s article on Saturday states that the DR has ‘accessed’ papers that James Blair, Company Secretary of RIFC, has lodged with the court regarding previously unknown aspects of the confidentiality agreement, so not in the public domain.Ralston also states (for clarity, presumably) that the DR’s source wasn’t ‘Rangers’.http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-claim-knew-nothing-confidentiality-6915178——————————————————————————
Ooooh…….if somehow Mr Ralston has ‘accessed’ papers lodged with the court, will this not be of interest to the Lord conducting the case?
Mr Ralston may well be on thin ice here.
In addition I suspect that SD/MA may too be interested in how such a leak of confidential information could occur in circumstances as outlined by Mr Ralston.
Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath.
easyJambo 30th November 2015 at 5:59 pm
‘=============================From JJ’s latest bloghttps://johnjamessite.wordpress.com/2015/11/30/leave-to-appeal/
_____
Grateful, eJ.
Such figures are there are suggest to me that BDO is kind of losing the plot.
Would it be very wrong to imagine that they must have been pushed by other vested interests ready to meet the expenses if their appeal ( if allowed) were to fail? Lots of would-be tax-dodgers, avoiders, evaders and sundry low-life ‘financial advisers’ out there who feel their wealth threatened.
Re the BDO appeal – is it possible that this is actually advantageous to and encouraged by HMRC in that their case becomes impregnable if the right to appeal, on points of law, is refused?
A solid precedent for use against other EBT offenders?
Almost as good as going all the way to the Supreme Court? But less costly?
Scottish Football needs a legal correspondent (no disrespect JC!)
Personally, I’m rather puzzled as to why BDO would want to appeal a decision that favours the largest creditor of the liquidation and whom invited The Court of Session to appoint them as Liquidators of RFC plc (IL)?
I doubt that HMRC will issue a Press Release on the application for Leave to Appeal the decision of the Court of Session to the Supreme Court.
However, has any budding or even accredited journalist lurking out there asked HMRC to comment?
I am not well versed in matters of court appeals so can anyone offer a view why BDO even want to appeal at all? The creditors pot will be what it is no matter what so why appeal? I’m also somewhat perplexed that an organisation who had no involvement at all in these cases at the outset has any right to appeal at all. Surely only David Murray should have that right.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-34964491
: “Following discussions with the company’s legal advisers and the liquidation committee, the joint liquidators have filed an application seeking leave to appeal the Inner House of the Court of Session decision in respect of the EBT case.
——————————————————————————————-
BBC points out the application was made by the joint liquidators. Does this mean the liquidators of the other MIH companies? ….Or am I way off track?
The Leave To Appeal can be seen as due process on behalf of BDO in the sense of ‘Fairness’, why? because they owe it to the ‘creditors’ to have a fair percentage share of the pot considered based on pence in the pound ratio. Remember HMRC as part of the liquidation Committee have gave their insight to the committee on their stance so I would imagine this is an ‘acceptable risk’ based on a majority CofS decision not being overturned. Although this prolongs the process it also emboldens any WIN on behalf of HMRC particularly if Leave to Appeal is rejected at CoS appellant level. Law Lords overturning their Peers’ ruling is something rare.
@CO off track I believe. Much like RFC had joint administrators from D&P they have joint liquidators (two named persons from BDO)
@UTH as I understand it David Murray as an individual can not appeal. Only the insolvency practitioners of 2 parts of his failed empire (MIH and RFC) can appeal as the taxation and NIC’s are against the companies.
@Deldon the CoS decision was unanimous not majority unless I’m mistaken. Even less precedent for leave to appeal being granted and appeal being successful.
Corrupt official 30th November 2015 at 7:01 pm
=================================
Rangers have joint liquidators, Malcolm Cohen and James Stephen.
I think the BBC were just being accurate.
If they spoke to the liquidation committee then that includes HMRC.
As I said previously, it would not surprise me in the slightest if HMRC are quite happy to have a Supreme Court ruling on this. It ties things up nicely.
What I want to know is how did Keith Jackson calculate this
I can accept that his original shares cost £2.5m (borrowed or not) and that he followed that up with a £1.5m loan (again, borrowed or not), but that is still only £4m. KJ just reprinting the Level 5 guff again methinks
@tykebhoy ‘unanimous’ the CofS decision was, I stand corrected. Getting my tribunal’s mixed with my judicial. So yes peers overturning very rare.
Caught 10mins of sportsound on the radio and instantly regretted it. To be fair I’ll redo on I player to check context.
Based on what I heard though could I recommend to messrs Spiers, English and Wilson that they should fail to declare half their salary going forwards, when directly asked they should fail to acknowledge it’s very existence and then, having spent the tax saved on a Ferrari, licence it as an Austin allegro, all on the basis that “it’s not technically illegal.”
I wish them well in their future endeavours!
Smugas 30th November 2015 at 7:42 pm #Caught 10mins of sportsound on the radio and instantly regretted it. To be fair I’ll redo on I player to check context.
============================
Looms like I made the right choice not to listen. It’s amazing how we have guys in our media who condemn large scale tax avoidance on the front pages, while those on the back pages do all they can to condone it. As I said earlier, they seem to dread the finality of Rangers being found guilty with no further avenue for appeal. I wonder why?