 Poster: A snowHead
|
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm... £58K??
In the bad old days I knew guys that would contract for a tenth of that. 
AND........... in the "bad old days" we used to get "Snow Guarantees" worth the recycledquilteddoublestrength they were written on.
I doubt Chris is quaking!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
An old friend once said ...."the worst divorce is your first divorce".........
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
Wayne, Congratulations 
The most impressive thing is that you actually got a cheque. Presumably as it's from the court it's not going to bounce.
So did the argument go with regards to the old v new company they set up ? (sorry if it's above somewhere.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Nicely done 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| AndAnotherThing.. wrote: |
| Presumably as it's from the court it's not going to bounce. |
Not sure about that - I think our government is a bit skint at the mo.
| AndAnotherThing.. wrote: |
| So did the argument go with regards to the old v new company they set up ? |
As I understand it (I am NOT a lawyer) the basics are that the whole of the UK (and most of the rest of the world) revolves around wealth creation by companies (they employ people who spend in shops, pay taxes, etc) so the whole system works fine. This system revolves around the precept that a shareholder can only be liable for the amount that they invest in a company. Fair enough, it keeps the entrepreneurial spirit alive.
But this system falls down when someone decides to use the system unlawfully.
Let’s face it times are hard, companies will fail and it’s very sad, but it happens a lot. But what about those few people who create a company and then run it until things get hard, then decide to transfer the business into a new limited company. This leaves the creditors of the old company to pay for the lifestyle of the directors; so they are the ones taking the risks, not the shareholders and the owners of the company just carry on as if nothing has happened.
We all know this happens all the time and it is normally said that’s just the way it is. A company directors just decides to tell the world to sod off and loads of lawyers back him up.
In my case they were using The insolvency Act 1986 s130 (2)
to simply cancell my claim by liquidating thier company whilst carrying on as if nothing had changed.
Anyway I decided to have a look at the realities of the situation and see if there was in fact any way to go after the shareholders of a failed limited company and their new (phoenix) company.
And guess what, there is. I’m not saying it was easy or that it will work in every case but it CAN be done.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| daveyladboy wrote: |
| I'm often offered inducements (free I pad for a booking this year - didn't take it). But some do... |
I do hope that you reported that. The Bribery Act has come in now, and is really rather strict about that sort of inducement. A business that attempts it can also find individuals charged if they fail to prevent their employees from doing this sort of thing too. Really quite a serious crime now, and worth reporting it for the benefit of kids and parents whose teachers are a little less scrupulous.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Wayne wrote: |
Anyway I decided to have a look at the realities of the situation and see if there was in fact any way to go after the shareholders of a failed limited company and their new (phoenix) company.
And guess what, there is. I’m not saying it was easy or that it will work in every case but it CAN be done. |
Interesting to know 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wayne
| Quote: |
Off to buy a big bag of Jelly Babies to celebrate.
|
I think wine gums are more the order of the day
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
Wayne, Well done indeed! What new car are you going to buy with the £56k
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Boredsurfing,
I haven't, going to use it to buy 2 new minibusses for the company.
Back on topic
Having said all that I very much doubt that the people who lost their cash when they booked a ski holiday for their kids will be able to get back anything and the reason is quite simple; lawyers.
Going to court in the UK is REALLY cheap. It only cost a few pounds to be able to sit there in front of a judge and plead your case. The costs start to mount when you start to use lawyers as, to put it as politely as I can, they take the mick with their fees.
As the amounts lost per family, will be MUCH less than a lawyer will charge to even look at it, there is no way that people can justify the expense.
But, if the parents were willing to spend some time doing some research they can do it themselves.
It’s a bit like going to see a doctor. I am not a doctor but as I spend quite a lot of my time leaping around in the Himalayas I need to be able to look after myself if I get a bug. I know just enough about “stuff” to be able to go to the local chemist (in Nepal) and tell them which antibiotic I think I need. If it all goes pear shaped then I only have myself to blame. I don’t need a doctor to tell me what antibiotic I need in most circumstance. It’s the same with seeing a lawyer. I don’t profess to know anything about the law in general, but if needed I can learn about specific types of law. If I study enough I will be able to (as I have done) argue against a barrister in a court, and win.
Just one example - the other sides lawyers spouted the same rubbish that they all do about a phoenix company being defined by section 216 of the Insolvency Act 1986 and so their client could not possible be blah blah blah. It was only as I had studied that I could point out that they were full of it – check it out if you like. Millions of websites (even, shockingly, law firms websites) say the same thing, that fact that’s s216 never mentions anything like that is simply ignored, as it’s just one of those things that everyone knows. (even the judge smiled a bit when they and everyone else in court looked it up in their books)
So you can learn enough about the law to be able to take on your own case. Looking at it realistically this is the only way the parents are ever going to get back their cash.
Top Tip for any parents that try. Basically ignore anything the other side’s lawyers say or threaten you with (and they will). They are just doing their job and you just need to do yours. Keep in mind that you have been wronged and this is why we have a justice system in place in the UK.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
Wayne, Out of interest, would you have been liable for the other sides costs had it gone against you ? Any idea what the number would be ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
| Wayne wrote: |
Oh and if they mention Salomon v Salomon to back their spurious argument (which they will), go and see a different lawyer.
|
Can they now quote Wayne v (Whoever it was) instead? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wayne, Sounds like you've created a decent precedent, what's your case name? What does your missus, whose IIRC is in the legal trade think about the scale of your achievement?
BTW weren't you the one advocating the suck it up & jog on approach earlier in this thread?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
fatbob,
| Quote: |
missus, whose IIRC is in the legal trade
|
Hmm, what was that about not using a lawyer?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
Wayne
Nice one! Was this in an Italian or English court?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
Monium,
It was phrased (in writimg) like this; "Book early for 2012/2013 and receive an iPad 2 for your school." Another company offered me a free jacket & salopettes if I booked with them, but they were nasty!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
fatbob,
I'll send you a PM with the skeleton and my WS - with details personality taken out - if you like.
Mrs W checked everything and said we had no chance.
But she also said the judge got out of bed on the right side day and the other side were way too smarmy.
But a Façade is a Façade as they say (Woolfson v. Strathclyde Regional Council [1978] SLT 159 )
As I said it may not work all other case as in this case they messed up on the (companies house) dates
(Philip Towers v Premier Waste Management Ltd (2011) LTL 28/7/2011 : [2011] EWCA Civ 923  )
It will be searchable soon no doubt.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
Bizarre that I checked this thread after months and saw this. Well done Wayne.
Now I just want to see CR put to rights and get his just desserts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Back in court this afternoon (taking a barrister this time - for various reasons )
Yet another minibus from 3 years ago.
The stupid thing is that we "had" a policy of buying from locals. Not any more; and they wonder in the press why people don't buy locally. This is the reason.
Ford transits for me from now (made in Turkey BTW).
Yeah I know they are ugly, but they work fine.
So if any SH's are booked onto our three (or four) peaks challenge next year or any of the Yorkshire multi-activity weekends, caving courses, rock claimbing intros, etc, etc, this is the reason you're in a transit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| fatbob wrote: |
Wayne, Sounds like you've created a decent precedent, what's your case name? What does your missus, whose IIRC is in the legal trade think about the scale of your achievement?
BTW weren't you the one advocating the suck it up & jog on approach earlier in this thread? |
Yeah, Wayne, what you tell others to do and what you do yourself seem to be at variance!
I'm pleased that you have been successful. Perhaps this will give encouragement to others to not let the scumbags get away with their scams.
Sharpen your claws and fight back is the new suck it up and jog on!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
Anyone know what happened to Mr R ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Blastfromthepast wrote: |
| Anyone know what happened to Mr R ? |
Some say he's a lurker on SnowHeads! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
New bankruptcy hearing date is the 5th Sept...
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
EDIT TO CHECK FACTS
any link?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
blahblahblah, yep, that's his gaff but variously described as Idehill Farm or Idehill Lodge etc
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
|
Bode Swiller, Sorry missed your post.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Reynard is in a lot of the photos showing the golf course - smary git that he is! I'm glad he is having to sell his gaff, he has been ripping off people big time for more than 30 years. Ripped me off in 1988/89 when I worked for him, didn't get paid and I was not covered for injury - had to use my own insurance when I was taken out by an out of control skier.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
Made my day
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
Journalism standards really not high if the Daily Fail can't put 2 and 2 together and write a salacious expose of how he was a player in the death of kids at Lyme Bay and ripping off countless middle class families whose kids were in tears about cancelled ski trips, yet he's been living like a king. They could still get their gratuitous property voyeurism worked into the story.
? Whether he is really the owner or if it is not ringfenced in his wife's name, trust etc?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
that was in the Daily mail today!! didnt mention who was selling it though, more the fact you get your own 18 hole golf course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
iskar, but you never know what might happen!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
The greens look rubbish.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
Ordered Bankrupt on 1 October 2012. Be interesting to see what the Official Receiver uncovers
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
altis So from your link he is declared bankrupt from 1 October 2012 and is then automatically discharged from being bankrupt on 1 October 2013. Presumably that means that as from that date he can form a new company and start trading again?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alastair Pink, Unless he gets a disqualification order banning him from being a director (or acting as a director if not a director in name) then that is right. I think he was a director of at least one of his companies and if now in liquidation the liquidator (or Official Receiver if he was acting) has to file a report with the DTI (or whatever it is called these days) commenting on the conduct of the directors. It is then up to the DTI to consider whether to seek a banning order. Sadly, in my experience, that department is so overworked and under-resourced that only the most serious cases get looked at in any detail. The number of orders issued each year is fairly small.
It is complete madness that someone can automatically be discharged after 1 year. The creditors don't get paid, potentially ruining lives, and the bankrupt is allowed to carry on almost as normal after only a very short period. When someone has had some bad luck, perhaps trying his best to get a business off the ground that goes bust, then they should be given a second chance after a brief period. For CR that would not appear to be the case. His track record would appear to speak for itself if the contents of this thread can be believed. IMHO it's a disgrace.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It would seem he is neither on the insolvency register nor the disqualified directors register and his house is still up for sale (offers over £3m).
Teflon Man or what!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
wayne, more people prepared to do this (frankly with the time and energy) required. Great effort. Produce a website telling people how to or just a blog.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nickski, bit late think he might have taken his ball back never to darken these pages again over eogate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
