We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
Thank you
My missus was far to trusting with these muppets. 10 k to nothing in one easy move. If the digital division is so exciting then you would have put some good money inmaking it work. Now the banks can swallow a £2 billion pound pill doesn't mean you can carry on as if nothing happened. Increasingly tempted to talk crap and buy £2 million worth of houses and say sorry I might be able to afford it but much better I get it for free coz u know I'm worrth it guv. The decision to shaft shareholders is deliberate. Even Dick Turpin wore a mask!!!! Make every effort to drive Yell/Hibu into the ground.
Totally given up hope -------------- HSG -- getting nowhere - and Yell/ Hibu still asking businesses to advertise with them -- or set up internet pages -- so they still making money but who is getting it????????????
It's not over yet so don't give up hope, though I realise It may seem to be if you haven't been privvy to some of the discussions and findings of the hSG. Suffice it to say for the time being that all seems to have most certainly not been above board, though all you can really do now is wait and see (and watch this space, I suppose, for as long as it continues to be maintained). I note that BP never responded to the question I posed re. the legal requirement of a publicly listed company to convene a GM to address the issue of reduced net assets under the circumstances I described - that's just a taster. Try to have a pleasant weekend.
Can I still transfer those shares into certificate, if yes, is it worth it or is to late? Thanks
If you are sitting on the outside you have 24hrs before the door shuts. Don't look back with regret for not sending an email to Chris and the team. The fight is just entering a new phase. For further information see: www.hibu-shareholders-group.com Or e-mail hibu shareholders@gmail.com
Now is gone? Is there any hope of any money from this company ?? looks like HSG were waste of time and money??
Mr Piler No I don't, the question is what will happen next....
Correction - meant "once the net assets of the company falls below half the value of the issued share capital." The question is still valid.
Well what about the legal requirement for a publicly listed company to convene a General Meeting as soon as is practicable after its market capitalisation falls below half the value of the issued share capital. I repeat - that is a LEGAL requirement. Do you think this manoeuvre discharges their obligation in respect of that?
Shame the shares are being delisted and probably this thread wound up... it was just getting interesting again!
The Companies act section 656 I'm surprised no-one has commented previously as it goes back over twelve months, I don't have a copy to hand so I would suggest interested parties undertake a Google search. You would also have to look at the history of trading at the time in relation to the write downs. In my opinion it does have quite a bearing on my previous mail re the first date when the BOD forcast Insolvency, but that is my opinion I suggest you undertake your own research, I will gladly admit if I've made a mistake.
Piler - stop being obtuse and state your case.
"I didn't realise they'd broken the law." Evidently.
BP I agree, my question would be at what stage did they know that Insolvency was the only option as the timing of this has some bearing on if the shares should have been suspended much earlier. I would say that there are an awful lot of unanswered questions which at some point in the future require addressing.
I didn't realise they'd broken the law. Are the police investigating? What did they do.....allegedly!
Clearly there is a huge amount of frustration regarding the admin but it was made very clear what was going to happen should the HS Group be seen to obtain sufficient shareholder votes prior to the GM, Bob has done exactly what he said he would do. I would suggest that the HSG where aware of this and would have an alternative plan in place, what that will be, will I'm sure materialise in time, but as has been made clear already the BOD have broken the law so it will be quite interesting to see what happens next.
Jumeirah - the BoD were at risk of wrongful trading if they didn't do what they have done. These measures only provide redress in terms of the debts. Shares don't apply. I think you'll have to rely on the liquidator who would be appointed after the administration is concluded. He will investigate directors. Main problem is funding the liquidator. MOT by the way!!
9. Can a director, partner, parent entity (domestic or foreign) or other party be held liable for an insolvent debtor's debts? The main ways in which a company's directors (including de facto and shadow directors) can be held liable to contribute to the company's assets are as follows: Misfeasance or breach of fiduciary duty. A liquidator, any creditor or any contributory can bring proceedings against any officer of the company or anyone involved in promoting, forming or managing the company, in connection with any alleged misfeasance or breach of fiduciary or other duty. Fraudulent trading. Any person who is or was knowingly a party to the carrying on of business by a company with intent to defraud creditors may be liable to contribute to the company's assets. Criminal penalties may also be imposed for fraudulent trading even if the company is not insolvent. Wrongful trading. A successful wrongful trading action imposes personal liability on directors if they allow a company to continue trading after they knew, or ought reasonably to have known, that there was no reasonable prospect of avoiding insolvent liquidation. However, it is a defence to a wrongful trading action if the directors can show that, from the relevant time, they took every step to minimise the potential loss to the company's creditors. This allows directors to continue with a restructuring if they conclude that there is a reasonable prospect of avoiding liquidation and improving the return to creditors.
Shaa - Doesn't it worry you that no one can answer the most basic of questions? It's a public forum. If you don't like it go to the private ones.
KNIGELK - the PLC is in admin. The administrators job is to realise the best value for the assets for the benefit of stakeholders in order of priority (creditors first). Shareholders lose whether it is a pre-pack or not because the company they have invested in is massively insolvent and the rights of creditors need to be protected in order of priority. Don't forget they have lost about £1.8bn. Lucando - this is not new and is enshrined in the Insolvency Act. You really should know these things before investing in a massively indebted company like Hibu.
Wazza - read the definition in the Insolvency Act. Either an excess of liabilities over assets or an inability to meet debts as they fall due. This fails on both since the assets (businesses) are worth less than 25% of the debts and there is no prospect of repaying the £2.3bn of debt. In these circumstances BoD has little choice.
People are posting on this forum and telling us again and again we are wasting our time, why go to these lengths? Their lives are so empty they must hang around these boards (probably not even invested here) OR there is another motive............ Either way SAD, if we shareholders of HIBU are going to lose our money, then let us!!!!!!!!!!!
If that is allowed to happen then I fear for the future of the financial industry in the UK. If this company can just transfer assets and jettison shareholders in this way then I am sure more companies will do the same. What controls are in place to prevent this? What legal right do they have to do this? What about the companies Act? These things don't seem to matter from what I can see.
Exactly what is in administration because it appears everything (business, employees, clients) have simply moved across to a new company owned by the lenders! So is it now just an empty shell with £1.8 billion debt around its neck while everything else goes on as normal. I know that's an quick simple wording of the complex technical world of insolvency and administration but pre-packs etc really should be looked at by the government because it is always the shareholders who end up the losers...