The latest Investing Matters Podcast with Jean Roche, Co-Manager of Schroder UK Mid Cap Investment Trust has just been released. Listen 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.
Indomie: yes, I understand that. The last reference I can see to the 25% was in December 2020. A maximum of $190mm. to be payable to creditors, then to shareholders. Maybe the hope of getting some payment in this regard is why Finablr plc is still extant. It’s got no business any more. But the chances of finding anything much in the rubble of this shambles are extremely low and, in view of the massive shortfall in its accounts when receivers were appointed, anything they do find is likely to go to the creditors - of whom there’s likely to be quite a number, with large claims - not shareholders.
I don’t want to appear a Job’s comforter though, so shall bow out.
..sorry, old iPad playing up. Finablr plc seems to be essentially defunct. Maybe there’s some loose ends to tie up and it needs to be kept as a corporate and legal entity until they are tied up, but it’s got no assets and any assets discovered from the alleged miscreants will go to the shareholders in Finablr Ltd. That’s my reading of it, anyway. Shareholders here, as in sister company NMC plc, have been the victims of lax regulation, but mostly victims of dishonest and unprincipled, or extremely stupid, management. You can’t blame yourselves, or even learn useful lessons from it. You’d have needed very extensive resources and expertise to have spotted wrongdoing here.
Bowlers12: i think shareholders here own shares in Finablr plc. That company, following all the events detailed in RNS’s over the past 18 months or so, has sold all its assets for a nominal consideration. The shareholders of Finablr Ltd. etc. are the Prism lot, not the Finablr plc shareholders, which appears to be
If that is purely the case prosser we might as well not bother to post anymore on here That is why I am awaiting companies house to tell me if Fin goes back on lse are we still able to trade in these shares otherwise we are ****ed
I sent this to Robert Miller on Monday, it’s apparently what you have to do to lodge a complaint-
Good morning Robert
Active — Active proposal to strike off Has been lodged at companies house, however this has not been communicated to shareholders. I will be writing to the Financial Obusman shortly if there is nothing RNS.
Is this not merely a housekeeping issue? The company has new owners, is it not they whose vote to de-list is required, rather than the original shareholders? Finablr has gone through receivership and a reconstruction in which the previous shareholders were disenfranchised and lost their investment.
I have just emailed Companies House to ask them hypthephetically whether they can force fin to relist without naming them, if I said fin, I think they would have said they were not allowed to answer
I will post their answer on here when I get a reply
The way I see this now:
FCA wont allow them to delist without a shareholder vote, so keeping companies house alive is either to prove that Finablr is a current company and stay’s suspended forever.
Or
use the situation to reissue the shares in Wizz name and do a capital raise and get some coin in.
Or
The other option being a strike off would prove the company has been transferred to Wizz and they will be forced to lift the suspension and trade under Wizz.
either way they may have ****ed up and we would be back in business!
Have to release the suspension under either entity
I have just seen this maybe a lifeline for us yet I don't see why thy wouldn't want to relist because there might be some brave souls who reinvest with them and obviously the shares would then be with new company
I personally would be on at 8pm to sell my shares at 8am that day at any price sp was only 5p when I bought them
I read it that way, maybe just saying that to give the impression they care but I’m hoping they can provide the relevant information to get it active.
FCA didnt want to delist the shares so maybe they see the shares as a funding op now and need to keep companies house active until they decide how to milk the market.
Either way, I’ve seeing life in the old dog yet lol
Tue, 8th Feb 2022 16:07
RNS Number : 0698B
Finablr PLC
08 February 2022
08 February 2022
Finablr PLC ("Finablr" or the "Company")
Finablr PLC (the "Company") has received notice from the Registrar of Companies on 11 January 2022 that, unless cause is shown to the contrary within 2 months of the date of the notice, the Company will be struck off the register and dissolved. The Company is currently in the process of resolving the queries raised by Companies House in relation to the striking off notice and will release further updates in due course.
Does it read that Fin don't want to be struck off? Why bother to answer concerns?
We should be hearing Elrey about Fin which I think should be struck off next week
Hopefully our CEO Robert ****earse finds it hard to get another job with his incompetence
I don't know about you, but I would to see all of them in jail, starting with our Ceo
Yup, it will be dissolved and disappear from Companies House sooner or later, 100%. It's just a matter of time. Anybody wishing to sue them ( and force it into compulsory liquidation in an attempt to reclaim the money they are owed) will have to apply to reinstate the company to the Companies House Register first.
What's the most shocking is that those crooks who took part in it are not even blacklisted anywhere. In theory, they could incorporate in UK tomorrow and just carry on as usual. And even if you can go legal, they will bury you in legal fees using your own money they have stolen from you. Regulators are completely useless, and so are the lawmakers. I read somewhere that 27% of funding for the work of the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) comes from accounting firms (the very same accounting firms involved in all those scams) and more bits from the external sponsors..... The whole system needs a radical revolution, Limited Liability concept (and other associated concepts) are regularly used to exploit individual investors and businesses all over the world. Rotten corporate jungle, trust no one.
Shocking
ELREY: yes, the deterioration in standards in London is shocking and deplorable. In the case of AIM, it’s worse than Perth and Vancouver at their lowest, in my view. I think the rationale is that these companies are going to list somewhere, tons of listing and ongoing advisory fees are going to be paid, so it might as well be here. I’ve used this expression before, but it’s a form of regressive taxation: money is being resdistributed on a lavish scale from a lot of relatively poor private individual investors to a few well-off financiers. Disgaraceful and, as you’ve observed, nothing is done about it.
PS. As an investor I literally feel like I cannot trust any financial information provided by any company....Any. And there is no effective mechanism preventing and punishing corporate thievery either. Regulators do nothing, law is powerless. The culture of honesty and trust does mot exist, greed & corruption are omnipresent. Management information is credible until it's not, the financial statement present "true and fair view" until they are not, corporate thieves walk freely laughing at us all.
Can't understand 11.jan. was posted struck off registered. To provide paperwork after objection to struck off should be given in 14 days if not it will be struck off.so what is the final date because I understand not everyone made objection on 11. Jan. So what a ,,,,,,. It can continue for months like this or no?
OofyProsser
I agree. Box-ticking culture at best, but i would not exclude "intentional, dishonest, deliberate" from the realm of possibilities either...It is what it is, I'm afraid.
ELREY: I believe that Muddy Waters referred to NMC, Finablr’s sister company, as a retirement benefit scheme for ex-E&Y audit partners. Words to that effect, anyway. You’re right, the modern audited accounts are inadequate. Though there was enough financial information in the public sphere, principally the report and accounts, which they compared in detail with NMC’s local competitors’, for Muddy Waters to form a strong opinion on the underlying state of affairs. It’s extremely difficult for private investors and under-resourced investment management firms to conduct analysis to an equivalent standard. Basically, these two companies appear to have been just crooked. The box-ticking culture that’s developed within regulatory compliance and oversight in the City since Big Bang will never catch this kind of thing and the absence of any serious penalties for wrong-doers when they’ve been exposed (though not by the regulators) merely allows them to carry on unmolested.
a) "Auditors do not take responsibility for the financial statements on which they form an opinion. The responsibility for financial statement presentation lies squarely in the hands of the company being audited."
b) "Independent auditor is engaged to render an opinion on whether a company’s financial statements are presented fairly, in all material respects, in accordance with financial reporting framework. The audit provides users such as lenders and investors with an enhanced degree of confidence in the financial statements. An audit conducted in accordance with IAS and relevant ethical requirements enables the auditor to form that opinion. To form the opinion, the auditor gathers appropriate and sufficient evidence and observes, tests, compares and confirms until gaining reasonable assurance. The auditor then forms an opinion of whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error."
They basically don't guarantee anything and don't take responsibility for anything. They only "express their opinion" that is supposed to "enhance confidence". Not sure why that clownish profession full of fluid terms still exists to be honest. They lost all credibility ages ago and have been involved in countless scams since. Former EY partner was on FIN board. It's all connected. Scammers.