RE: gas or no gas18 Mar 2021 14:14
Done K. A lot depends upon when the funding is announced and what the funding is for? There is case for negligence for the word "imminent". There may be case of fraud for excessive funding when and if the parties are connected with BOD within the meaning of CGTA 1979. I am very suspicious of £12 million as there is no need. If I was running the show, a few million would do the job. of getting to first gas. The deceit of deliberate concealment of cost escalation can have the directors barred. In summary, negligence and suspected fraud. I have seen execution of much larger an complex deals in similar time frame. This one is overdue if I may suggest that. I am holding. And I am patient.
What is unacceptable is the massive pay increase for the BOD to reward failure and negligence. And the news about Lidsey appear to be outright fraudulent. We have heard that non sense before. This time the BOD are exposed as even the news were to be true, it shows they were grossly negligent in handlining the asset . BOD keep rewarding themselves for screwing up company assets. Such BOD should be retained at Her Majesty's pleasure in the special accommodation provided by the CPS upon successful conviction.
I intend to have all the BOD disqualified and sue the auditors and BOD jointly and severally when the time comes and the need arises.