CCFC Ltd administrator charges over £444k (13 Viewers)

Forums New posts
W

wingy

Well-Known Member
You'd have to assume rather than just say the books were a mess and needed straightening up of the Structure ,IF It pertained evidence of wrongdoing

by previous club directors ,Mr Fisher would have been all over It and secured a proper Investigation by the appropriate body .
 
letsallsingtogether

letsallsingtogether

Well-Known Member
Grendel said:
So why did you say is Tim Fusher under investigation. (See above)? The article by mentioning his name must have drawn you to conclude this surely?
Click to expand...
TBF it could go back years but let's be honest here some are better at hiding it then others.
Just look at the banking situation very rare the top guy gets caught just his hangeroners.
Yet they pay top dollar to keep them in a job that they have totally fuck up.
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
skybluetony176 said:
Might have been a better idea to ask Simon then instead of me. Like Wingy did.
Click to expand...

Well no because you clearly made the association from the article. - when Robno says it wasn't him you said it doesn't say it isn't. So you were clear drawn to a conclusion from what you read.

If the paragraph below had said Mile mcginnity the only director then you wouldn't have said Tim fisher would you? (Not that I am inferring its mcginnity by the way)
 
letsallsingtogether

letsallsingtogether

Well-Known Member
Grendel said:
Well no because you clearly made the association from the article. - when Robno says it wasn't him you said it doesn't say it isn't. So you were clear drawn to a conclusion from what you read.

If the paragraph below had said Mile mcginnity the only director then you wouldn't have said Tim fisher would you? (Not that I am inferring its mcginnity by the way)
Click to expand...
No but that's what your hoping.
 
W

wingy

Well-Known Member
Maybe Mr Ainsworth ,Cunningham or Robinson could find out ,If they still spend time In the village .

Utilise their networks??
 
letsallsingtogether

letsallsingtogether

Well-Known Member
Grendel said:
Ah ;) I don't know why you'd think that.

I think we all have a fairly good idea who it is and it's not him.
Click to expand...

Don't spoil it I am sure that nothing will come of it anyway.
One thing I do know can't pin it on me this time.
 
oldskyblue58

oldskyblue58

CCFC Finance Director
The liquidator will investigate the conduct of all the directors going back for at least 2 years. The liquidator is an officer of the court and can decide who merits investigation and the time period to be covered based on the information he has received already

A report to the relevant government department is not necessarily evidence of wrong doing so we should not jump to any conclusions.
 
letsallsingtogether

letsallsingtogether

Well-Known Member
oldskyblue58 said:
The liquidator will investigate the conduct of all the directors going back for at least 2 years. The liquidator is an officer of the court and can decide who merits investigation and the time period to be covered based on the information he has received already

A report to the relevant government department is not necessarily evidence of wrong doing so we should not jump to any conclusions.
Click to expand...

Spoils Sport.:)
 
chiefdave

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
Does anyone really think an investigation by Appleton, who was appointed by SISU and couldn't even work out who owned what, is going to show Fisher, or anyone else from SISU, in a bad light?
 
skybluetony176

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
chiefdave said:
Does anyone really think an investigation by Appleton, who was appointed by SISU and couldn't even work out who owned what, is going to show Fisher, or anyone else from SISU, in a bad light?
Click to expand...

IF, IF something dodgy has gone on and Appleton is an officer of the court surely he would have to report it by law or he would be breaking the law himself?

Like has already been highlighted though the report could just say nothing dodgy has gone on, no further action required.
 
fernandopartridge

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
Chief Dave - you're very keen on transparency yet completely ignore the fact that the local council made the decision to borrow 14m to lend to a private company but didn't record minutes or notes.
 
chiefdave

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
skybluetony176 said:
IF, IF something dodgy has gone on and Appleton is an officer of the court surely he would have to report it by law or he would be breaking the law himself?

Like has already been highlighted though the report could just say nothing dodgy has gone on, no further action required.
Click to expand...

If his report deliberately covered something up then he could be in trouble but what if he just didn't look very hard for any issues.
 
chiefdave

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
fernandopartridge said:
Chief Dave - you're very keen on transparency yet completely ignore the fact that the local council made the decision to borrow 14m to lend to a private company but didn't record minutes or notes.
Click to expand...

Not entirely sure what that's got to do with Appleton's report or the liquidation of CCFC Ltd.

I would suggest that the first thing that would be need to looked at there is, by not having minutes or notes, have the council breached any rules or regulations. If they have then I would assume there is a formal route to take for further action to be taken. If they haven't then, past requesting further information either through an FOI (unlikely to reveal anything) or speaking directly to you local councillor, there's not a lot that can be done. I would have thought if anything untoward had happened in the loan process SISU's lawyers would have been all over it in court during the JR.
 
Ian1779

Ian1779

Well-Known Member
skybluetony176 said:
IF, IF something dodgy has gone on and Appleton is an officer of the court surely he would have to report it by law or he would be breaking the law himself?

Like has already been highlighted though the report could just say nothing dodgy has gone on, no further action required.
Click to expand...

I said this all along in relation to the administration. When the CVA was rejected the parties that did so should have pushed for the process to be looked at in terms of legal process.

If they did that - then we are in a situation where no wrong doing was found (morally - well that may be a different story).

If they did not pursue it - then there can be no justification of it's rejection.
 
skybluetony176

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
Ian1779 said:
I said this all along in relation to the administration. When the CVA was rejected the parties that did so should have pushed for the process to be looked at in terms of legal process.

If they did that - then we are in a situation where no wrong doing was found (morally - well that may be a different story).

If they did not pursue it - then there can be no justification of it's rejection.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't disagree with that.
 
C

covkid53

New Member
£440k because it was complex, everything sisu do is complex. Smoke, mirrors and more offshore businesses and accounts than you could name. Its all offset. Makes one wonder if there are any real assets anywhere. Or is it a bottomless pit of nothingness.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 14 (members: 0, guests: 14)
Top