Whose assets are they anyway?

Avatar By

In a very recent blog JJ alerted his audience to …

Comment on Whose assets are they anyway? by Billy Boyce.

In a very recent blog JJ alerted his audience to the [] jetting in to Blighty.  We then had Radar Jackson asking searching questions in his sports column.  According to JJ, King did come to Glasgow this week, so why did Jackson not avail himself of the ideal opportunity to doorstep the Ibrox Messiah?  Don’t tell me that Jackson or any of the other distinguished stenographers would have been unaware of the visit.
The other point JJ has made in his last two scribblings is that Level5 no longer act for the Ibrox club.  Twitter messages (for what they are worth) suggest that a large bill to Level5’s principal client remains unpaid and that Traynor & Co are contemplating recovery action.  Having sunk his pension into creating Level5 I’m sure that Traynor will not simply write-off such a substantial debt, regardless of any loyalty he may have to his now former client.
It will be interesting to see if Phil’s source(s) agree with JJ that King is about to make legal moves to recover his £5m loan.  According to JJ, such action would be pursued under English law.  With regard to King’s statement about Ashley’s on-going litigation, JJ suggests that Rangers has yet to settle the costs for its unsuccessful court action and that Ashley’s legal team is becoming rather impatient. 
Be it Traynor or Ashley, will we see the sheriff officers down Edmiston Drive anytime soon?

(Tykebhoy, I haven’t had a chance to read Phil’s latest – thanks for the heads up.)

Billy Boyce Also Commented

Whose assets are they anyway?
that Thomson chappie giving his tuppenceworth


Whose assets are they anyway?
wottpi 6th November 2015 at 4:29 pm
I just put it down to some folk getting caught up in their own hubris and believing themselves to be invincible
I wish I had the time to look at the early RTC blogs.  From memory, when HMRC discovered that RFC had issued the EBT recipients with side letters it wrote to the club requesting production of them.  An ex-Inland Revenue officer at Ibrox was the designated club official who dealt with tax matters.  This official repeatedly fobbed off HMRC by denying such side letters existed or simply refused to give visiting Revenue officers access to the relevant staff files.  This procrastination was carried out with the full knowledge and, no doubt, encouragement of SDM.  They must have assumed HMRC was a toothless tiger, hence the contemptuous attitude down Govan way – and, of course, the shredder.
In my view this was tantamount to criminal conduct and could have rendered certain individuals liable to legal proceedings.  However, being primarily a tax-collecting department, HMRC took the decision to recover the outstanding tax with interest and impose monetary penalties on RFC (the ‘taxpayer’) under the provisions of UK tax regulations.
 On a lighter note, I wonder what the late legendary Nottingham Forest manager would had said in the wake of the Court of Session appeal verdict yesterday?

Whose assets are they anyway?
I posted this comment on Alex Thomson’s blog earlier, but I must still be in moderation.

“A previous legal judgement ruled that the club gained no advantage.”
Alex, if you are referring to the Lord Nimmo Smith “judgment” then your comment (above) is not correct.  LNS, having a legal background, was engaged by the Scottish football authorities purely as a consultant.  His pronouncements on the Rangers BTC or title-stripping have absolutely no standing in law.

Recent Comments by Billy Boyce

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
Sorry, the Sunday Mail extract I posted (above) omitted the Mark Allen article – now attached 

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
Homunculus December 24, 2017 at 12:15
Does anyone else suspect that  Mr Allen may see his future elsewhere.
It looks as if there is a whispering campaign against Allen within the Blue Room.  The Sunday Mail article (attached) suggests Mark is getting his retaliation in first before he becomes the next club official to ‘resign’.  Even the Herald feels the need to give its tuppenceworth on his role in this latest saga.  I wonder who has suddenly turned the spotlight on the esteemed Director of Football?

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
Does impecuniosity trump concomitant?

” Given the circumstances put forward by the respondent in support of his supposed impecuniosity they are of no significance. His impecuniosity is entirely self-generated….the Trusts have been willing to provide money for the purchase of Rangers shares when the respondent wished them to do so. Now, suddenly, when the respondent does not wish to comply with the terms of Rule 9 the Trusts no longer are willing to provide any money. “

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
WOTTPI Dec 20th 2017 at 16.56
As an aside it is obvious Lord Bannatyne wants things off his desk before the festive break.
If indeed His Lordship promulgates his judgment on Friday 22nd then I for one would be highly suspicious of the baffling delay in doing so.  Lord Bannatyne was required to make a comparatively simple ruling on whether he “may” or “must” decide.  It is not as if he was tasked with safeguarding the constitution of the realm.  Even sending a felon to the gallows would not entail the length of time this matter has sat on his desk.
With the recent flurry of activity down Ibrox way, I wonder if Lord Bannatyne has deliberately waited until certain moves have been completed so that any ‘cold shoulder’ process against King becomes superfluous.  Time and truth will tell.

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
Sour grapes or just some mischief making?  I heard on Radio Scotland’s sports slot this morning that Chris Jack is reporting there’s more to the McInnes appointment saga than meets the eye.  Apparently, progress talks even got as far as Derek selecting the Ibrox side for the Ross County game on Saturday.  Has the Concomitant King instructed his PR guru to stir the pot? 

About the author