REMINDER: Our user survey closes on Friday, please submit your responses here.
Tbh the damage has been done and I for one wouldn’t be any more upset if it folded today.
At least the loses are fully crystallised then and the damages claim against the company and its agents can commence in earnest.
It’ll take a while but I’m patient and above all I will not forgive nor forget who the protagonists have been in this play and await for justice to be administered one way or another.
The correct result is to expunge all of their dealings. Logistically difficult I know, but not impossible and the correct legal path given their position was obtained by deceit. Anything short of that is a licence for others to emulate as it obviously pays.
Certainly working to a different agenda than the one he holds official office for, nay, the office is his legal duty to work in the best interest for.
Failed everyone, including his own family now.
Still think Cowen stood down due to TR over ruling the RNS’d plan to increase injectant in Q4 and if the rumours are true then TRs shenanigans at the negotiating table with the JVP is what collapsed the JV.
He really needs locking up and his illegal actions overturned, only then will we get back to where we were last summer.
Contemptible clown needs bringing to his knees….
The problem I have as a LTH is the destruction of the SP as a consequence of the overdone dilution by illegal means. Even if they exit stage left today the damage has been done and I wouldn’t want them to profit from that.
So to me the only viable solutions are either the recent bonds and warrants from September and December are expunged, or a damages claim to the effect they didn’t exist is made against them.
Yes they signed an unconscionable contract to the detriment of the corporation and its shareholders, a failure in the BoD past and present in their fiduciary duty.
Unless there’s a shut down, rolling back and expunging of the bonds and associated shares and warrants then the only real course of action is the one being taken by the SHG, see you in court and hope they’ve got sufficient insurance to cover the damages…..
Tbh I’m not so sure they purchased any new gas in that period, look at the reduction in flaring due to the GGS upgrades and the re-injection of that gathered gas and not new gas….. just a thought.
It might actually be they gathered more gas than re-injected!
Extract of Canadian rules regarding their address disclosure:
Directors’ information is corporate information
Information about directors is corporate information, and as such, is required to be made public. It is important that it be made public because this disclosure lets people know who is responsible for the corporation. Those who may want to access public corporate information include shareholders, investors or legal counsel. While a person’s home address is usually considered to be personal information, the Privacy Act allows for this information to be made available to the public because corporate laws require its disclosure.
The address directors must provide can either be
a residential address
or
an address for service that is not their residential address. An address for service is an address where legal documents must be accepted by the director or someone on the director’s behalf.
A director’s address cannot be a post office box.
Corporate information regarding directors must be updated within 15 days of the change being made.….
Or trying to rewrite history covering their tracks for the unconscionable contract path, trying to tarmac over it..
It’ll be interesting to know if todays disclosures purporting to be from as far back as Dec 2022 are the same as the originals, not that we know that as we never got to see the originals.
Might need forensic examination of the documents to see when they were created or modified, not just taking the published today ones on face value.
Again one for the lawyers…
Very fishy though if you ask me…..
RBM et al FYI;
It seems the company are trying to fill in the gaps of their record keeping and public/shareholder information after the fact.
Not sure what the legal team would make of this, a bit like closing the stable door after the horse has bolted.
https://thecse.com/listings/canadian-overseas-petroleum-limited/sedar-filings/
As said it’s public information, besides he’s moved and needs to update the official record.
Didn’t someone post it was actually owned by a limited company, not TR.
I’d like to think he was paying the going rate in rent for it though, if not then he fully declared the benefit in kind (BiK) he was in receipt of to the HMRC for it, what’d think?
Addresses as per Canadian corporate rules…
https://ised-isde.canada.ca/cc/lgcy/fdrlCrpDtls.html?p=0&corpId=4204638&V_TOKEN=null&crpNm=Canadian%20overseas%20petroleum&crpNmbr=&bsNmbr=&cProv=&cStatus=&cAct=
Canadian rules say they must give an address they reside at and if it changes they MUST inform the regulators within 14 days to update the registry.
The Oxfordshire address TR gave seems to have been sold recently. I wonder if the Canadian authorities will sanction him for failing to update it.
Is that the route of the problem though, everyone’s conditioned to think MMs working in Consort with 3rd parties is OK and legal. Whereas it isn’t, you just have an ineffective self regulation overseen by ineffective oversight by the authorities to allow it to happen.
When it’s actually being used to hide illegal activities and is flagged, as it is here, then something is going to give.
People wonder why the London market is dying and most companies trade at a large discount to their real economic valve, aka their Nav.
The market is skewered towards short termism and it needs to change if the UK is to prosper, actions such as being pursued here may help.
Tldnr; we think MM actions are normal and legal, they’re not.
Still maintain the JVP looked at the BoD at the time and decided they couldn’t risk their reputation in dealing with such crooks.
It might have been a good partnership for the oil but their reputation is worth more….