breadandcheese Posted 29 November 2007 Share Posted 29 November 2007 A company is responsable for the debts of their company if it goes bankrupt only if it either trades as a 'sole trader' or 'partnership'. If the company is either a Limited company or PLC then it has 'limited liability' for its debts. which means if for example M&S go bust then the directors won't be responsable personally for the debts of their company and any other creditors they may owe money to. The corporate veil can be pierced if the directors are found to have behaved fraudulently and dishonestly when running a company. In this case, a director can then be held liable and is no longer protected by limited liability. Edit: I should say again that a good lawyer will make all this go away, if indeed there is actually anything to answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyh1884 Posted 29 November 2007 Share Posted 29 November 2007 A company is responsable for the debts of their company if it goes bankrupt only if it either trades as a 'sole trader' or 'partnership'. If the company is either a Limited company or PLC then it has 'limited liability' for its debts. which means if for example M&S go bust then the directors won't be responsable personally for the debts of their company and any other creditors they may owe money to. Trust me, I'm an accountant: Personal liability In certain circumstances directors may be liable for the debts of the company or to contribute to its assets. These include the following situations but the list is by no means conclusive. Fraudulent trading When a company goes into liquidation, if it appears that the business of the company has been carried on with intent to defraud creditors or for any fraudulent purpose, the liquidator can apply to the court for an order that anyone party to the fraud make such contribution to the company's assets as the court thinks proper. Note that it is not only directors who can be made liable under this provision. Wrongful trading When a company goes into insolvent liquidation and at some time before the liquidation a director knew that there was no reasonable prospect of avoiding liquidation, then the court can order that director to make a contribution to the assets of the company. This rule will not apply if the director can show that he took every step with a view to minimising loss to creditors which he ought to have taken. The most common type of wrongful trading arises where the company carries on trading when it is insolvent and has no reasonable prospect of paying its debts. From this website: Company law stuff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy G Posted 29 November 2007 Share Posted 29 November 2007 Trust me, I'm an accountant:Personal liability In certain circumstances directors may be liable for the debts of the company or to contribute to its assets. These include the following situations but the list is by no means conclusive. Fraudulent trading When a company goes into liquidation, if it appears that the business of the company has been carried on with intent to defraud creditors or for any fraudulent purpose, the liquidator can apply to the court for an order that anyone party to the fraud make such contribution to the company's assets as the court thinks proper. Note that it is not only directors who can be made liable under this provision. Wrongful trading When a company goes into insolvent liquidation and at some time before the liquidation a director knew that there was no reasonable prospect of avoiding liquidation, then the court can order that director to make a contribution to the assets of the company. This rule will not apply if the director can show that he took every step with a view to minimising loss to creditors which he ought to have taken. The most common type of wrongful trading arises where the company carries on trading when it is insolvent and has no reasonable prospect of paying its debts. From this website: Company law stuff Yeh im training to be one which firm do you work for? I agree with what that website is saying. But is it all relevant to LCFC? I really am not sure how the business is run in terms on company structure, its a tough one. From all this though I cant see MM being in trouble so much that he would become bankrupt?? therefore hopefully none of this talk will be applicable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyh1884 Posted 29 November 2007 Share Posted 29 November 2007 Yeh im training to be one which firm do you work for?I agree with what that website is saying. But is it all relevant to LCFC? I really am not sure how the business is run in terms on company structure, its a tough one. From all this though I cant see MM being in trouble so much that he would become bankrupt?? therefore hopefully none of this talk will be applicable. Used to work for Newby Castleman but now moved into industry. In terms of LCFC, none of this is relevant as the company is not in financial difficulties so the situations described in that article don't apply, it was more a general point in response to your post about when a company liquidates that it doesn't affect directors or owners in terms of repaying creditors Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James. Posted 29 November 2007 Share Posted 29 November 2007 Used to work for Newby Castleman but now moved into industry.In terms of LCFC, none of this is relevant as the company is not in financial difficulties so the situations described in that article don't apply, it was more a general point in response to your post about when a company liquidates that it doesn't affect directors or owners in terms of repaying creditors I was just about to point out that your whole discussion was completely irrelevant in terms of Mandaric and his arrest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy G Posted 29 November 2007 Share Posted 29 November 2007 Andy what I said originally is correct though? Unless they are involved in fraudulant trading where the rules in terms of liability go out the window? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danny. Posted 29 November 2007 Share Posted 29 November 2007 Not necessarily true - under company law in certain circumstances the directors can be responsible for the company's debts if they have run the company negligently or fraudulently Yes you're right, I was just giving that as an example as some people don't seem to see that LTD, LLP, PLC etc companies are different to a sole trader - I meant in general (i.e. not under illegal circumstances). I'm not a qualified accountant, only saying from my own experience running a business so probably not 100% on these matters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy G Posted 29 November 2007 Share Posted 29 November 2007 Yes you're right, I was just giving that as an example as some people don't seem to see that LTD, LLP, PLC etc companies are different to a sole trader - I meant in general (i.e. not under illegal circumstances).I'm not a qualified accountant, only saying from my own experience running a business so probably not 100% on these matters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyh1884 Posted 29 November 2007 Share Posted 29 November 2007 I was just about to point out that your whole discussion was completely irrelevant in terms of Mandaric and his arrest. Haha! Wouldn't be the first person to post something irrelevant in a topic on this forum. We'll be fine unless he's brought his 'dirty' money into the club, then I'm not sure what happens Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daggers Posted 29 November 2007 Share Posted 29 November 2007 If Ultra's crack legal team couldn't put me and TPH inside then MM has nothing to fear (as long as he doesn't do anything stupid like introduce a new mascot called Mohammed the Fox to the club). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy G Posted 29 November 2007 Share Posted 29 November 2007 If Ultra's crack legal team couldn't put me and TPH inside then MM has nothing to fear (as long as he doesn't do anything stupid like introduce a new mascot called Mohammed the Fox to the club). I feel sorry for that woman, wonder whats going to happen to her? The world has gone mad... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mancunianfox Posted 29 November 2007 Share Posted 29 November 2007 I feel sorry for that woman, wonder whats going to happen to her? The world has gone mad... Off topic but I can't feel sorry for her. She was teaching in Sudan and should have known better. Why teach in a country if your not prepared to learn their traditions and way of life? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manwell Pablo Posted 29 November 2007 Share Posted 29 November 2007 Oh god don't start this. General Chat now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daggers Posted 29 November 2007 Share Posted 29 November 2007 Oh god don't start this.General Chat now. You don't appear to be accepting the cultural differences of FT posters, Mohammed Pablo. Poor show. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manwell Pablo Posted 29 November 2007 Share Posted 29 November 2007 You don't appear to be accepting the cultural differences of FT posters, Mohammed Pablo.Poor show. I'd like to give you 40 lashes Dave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trumpet Posted 29 November 2007 Share Posted 29 November 2007 I'd like to get lashed, tonight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bellend Sebastian Posted 29 November 2007 Share Posted 29 November 2007 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7118825.stm Having yesterday posted a picture of Jewell looking not a day over 62, the BBC have gone one better today and found a picture of Harry Redknapp looking like a Star Wars monster. What do you mean he always looks like that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fez of Mahrez Posted 29 November 2007 Share Posted 29 November 2007 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7118825.stmHaving yesterday posted a picture of Jewell looking not a day over 62, the BBC have gone one better today and found a picture of Harry Redknapp looking like a Star Wars monster. What do you mean he always looks like that? Reading that report, it kind of reads as if the others were all arrested for questioning surrounding Milan's activities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The People's Hero Posted 29 November 2007 Share Posted 29 November 2007 I'm going to recycle that joke about getting lashed tonight - because I will be getting lashed tonight. I'm going to get lashed tonight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DannyLCFC1 Posted 29 November 2007 Share Posted 29 November 2007 Redknapp speaks to skysports He says its all about the agent paying the player part of his fee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ric Flair Posted 29 November 2007 Share Posted 29 November 2007 Reading that report, it kind of reads as if the others were all arrested for questioning surrounding Milan's activities. It doesn't read that way to me. I think it's the agent whose being pursued mainly here. But if Mandaric has got involved with anything on his part then, it's easy to see why he's been arrested. I'm not overly worried by this yet. The money laundering bit is confusing, is it seperate to the situation that the other 4 were arrested for or is it all connected? Surely if Mandaric had severe evidence against him for Money Laundering he wouldn't be released after a few hours of questioning, it's not an everyday crime like egging the Ice Cream Man. Just all seems strange how they make that quote without stating whether it's related to the other 4 or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ric Flair Posted 29 November 2007 Share Posted 29 November 2007 Redknapp speaks to skysports He says its all about the agent paying the player part of his fee Redknapp is not a happy fish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fat Ron Posted 29 November 2007 Share Posted 29 November 2007 it's not an everyday crime like egging the Ice Cream Man I like it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fox in a Box Posted 29 November 2007 Share Posted 29 November 2007 Portsmouth boss Harry Redknickingnapp has denied any wrongdoing after being arrested by police following an inquiry into alleged corruption in football He was one of a group of five men arrested on suspicion of conspiracy to defraud and false accounting. Portsmouth's chief executive Peter Storrie and the club's former chairman Milan Mandaric were among those arrested. Charlton midfielder Amdy Faye, currently on loan to Rangers, and agent Willie McKay were also reported to be the other men arrested. At a press conference on Thursday, Redknapp protested his innocence and declared Storrie and Portsmouth had not done anything wrong. Speculation "I've called this press conference today because I thought I needed to clear up the chain of events from yesterday because there has been so much speculation about what went on and the reasons why I was called in," said Redknapp. "I went to watch a game in Germany on Tuesday, to see Stuttgart play Glasgow Rangers and I travelled back on Wednesday morning - when I arrived back in Heathrow my wife was on the phone leaving hysterical messages. "The police had come round to our house at six in the morning accompanied by photographers of a very well known tabloid newspaper. I don't know how they found out about the police arriving - I don't know - good guess? "My wife then allowed them in, they raided my house, they also raided Peter Storrie's house. They took a computer away from my house that I bought my wife two years ago and she just learnt to turn it on four weeks ago - there's nothing on it. "I got a message to report to the police station where I spent a good part of the day and the whole crux of the meeting they wanted to discuss with me, to discuss with Peter, was the fact an agent had been paid an agent fee and he'd paid some of the money to the player - who was his player. That was the whole top and bottom of it as far as I was concerned. "I had a meeting with my whole staff and players today. I called them in and said 'you've read plenty of stuff in the papers; this is exactly what it was all about. I said the agent had allegedly paid some of agents' fee to the player'. "They all wanted the agent's number because they've never heard of an agent before who'd wanted to give a player money. "As far as I was concerned, I wondered what I was doing there. I'm really not involved, as I'm not involved in who gets agent fees and who doesn't. "Peter got called in, you couldn't meet a nicer or straighter guy than Peter Storrie. He works with honesty and integrity. Milan was called in, he was the man who came in and saved this football club, now at Leicester. "This club is completely transparent, it's totally honest and nothing goes on that we're afraid of. Any investigations that have gone on, the club have co-operated fully and helped everyone. Transparent "I was bitterly disappointed that the police should come knocking on my door at six in the morning with photographers. My wife was in on her own, she was absolutely petrified. "If you can tell me that's the way to treat anybody, then I'm afraid that's not the society I was brought up in. "I still feel I was only called in because I have a high profile, I add a bit of a profile to the investigation. "Really and truly, this is absolutely nothing to do with me. It's nothing to do with my field. What the agent does with his player is nothing to do with us - that's between the agent and the player. "I've had some fantastic support. Some great emails. I say emails - Karen passed them on to me because I haven't got a computer! "I've had some fantastic text messages - this is a fantastic football club. It's a well run club from top to bottom. We're in the highest position we've been in for fifty years and we need to get back concentrating on the football. "Why it had to be brought into the public domain I still find very difficult to understand. "It has deeply hurt both me and my family." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
renards Posted 29 November 2007 Share Posted 29 November 2007 Oh god don't start this.General Chat now. do you mean to blaspheme? can be stoned for that (stoned as in hit with bolders, not being out of your head) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.