Member Info for Piltick

Info sent as requested.

Thanks Grant. Enjoy your coffee and chat at Stratton St.!

That's to prevent infiltration from Mars!

4unme: No I don't know why you can't register. What does it say, does it give you an error message when you try to register?

All of our posts on this BB are automatically copied across to discussthemarket.com. We can of course post directly into discussthemarket.com if we register as individuals. I asked them if, in the event that AMI is closed in lse, would they leave our BB in discussthemarket.com open. The answer is yes. Here's what they said: "I can confirm that the stream log for AMI will continue on discuss the market for as long as the EPIC remains u allocated to a company. If another company becomes listed with the AMI EPIC then they will then take over the stream and messages older than 7 days will be pruned. However, messages on the forum will remain, even if the company changes. If you are concerned about other bulletin boards disappearing, I would suggest you use the DTM forum for your discussions as this is neither pruned nor removed following a company going into administration. You are also welcome to create a custom discussion if you wish. Each custom discussion comes with a stream and a forum. More information is here: http://www.discussthemarket.com/customs/1/ I hope this helps. Kind regards Daniel " So this is another option in the event that we lose this BB. The advantage of DTM (discussthemarket.com) is that it retains all of our historic postings, and we can view by thread or individual posting just as we can here.

Forgot to attach the link: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/9851679/Cattles-sues-PwC-for-1.6bn-because-of-alleged-audit-negligence.html

In addition to the successful claim made by Cattles shareholder group, represented by Clarion, there was also a claim against the auditors lodged by the administrator Zolfo Cooper (now part of AlixPartners). This started in 2013 and I cannot find any reports of its conclusion. It may not be finished yet, or it may have been settled out of court. But it just demonstrates that it is possible to take a case against the auditors if it can be shown that they have omitted to highlight or challenge errors or misrepresentations in the accounts.

Depends on which solicitor is selected once Grant & Co have chosen from the shortlist.

Yes, the article is wrong. And the RNS also said: "The Company is working to identify an appropriate insolvency practitioner to represent and protect the interests of the creditors and stakeholders of the Company." We await with interest to see who they appoint.

I aree. My thought was £100 for the initial advice, then we can look at how much we think we might need to take it forward and at that point probably work out an amount per share, regardless of how much each person paid for the shares. By the way - Who / What is SP??

I see that people are still signing in on the petition. Now 207 have signed it. It would be interesting to know how many of those have sent an e-mail to amipic@outlook.com giving details and saying that they are willing to contribute towards the initial legal costs. I would hope that most of those, close to 200, would be prepared to contribute £100 or even £200 initially, then we can take it from there.

4unme: If that's the case then we definitely need to go after GB as well. Of course this is dependent upon legal advice when we get it, but it may be difficult to cross the border to get at him in SL. I'm not sure if he is a director of the main board - I think he is, so that may make things easier.

Thanks for that Pablo. The only problem is that we would lose all of our historical chat, and there may be nothing we can do about that. Another possibility that I'm investigating is discussthemarket.com. All of the postings from else.com are automatically fed through to discussthemarket.com so there is a complete record there. I have sent an e-mail to them asking if their BB could be kept open if AML disappears from lse. I will post the reply up here when I get it.

Is there anything that the rest of us need to do as a matter of urgency, other than sending our email to amipic@outlook.com?

We may also want to include the auditors in that list, if we find that company funds went "astray" without being discovered by the auditors.

I have been giving further thought to the antics of SISG and AML last week, and taking a cool look at it again in more detail, actually not a lot has really happened. So SISG has taken control of the operating companies. But all they have done so far is installed more of their directors on the boards of these two SL project operating companies. At the moment these companies are not working, as they are under C&M. SISG have not gained ownership as that issue has yet to be settled, hence the reason that the court has extended the injunction pending "arbitration" (per the RNS). And that's how SISG were able to take "control" so quickly after the court hearing. All they had to do was to establish bums on seats. AML, the holding company, still exists (pending admin) and is not immediately affected by SISG putting their directors into the project companies. Funds have been released by SISG from the HK joint a/c to pay the nationals and expats. Presumably these people were employed by the project companies and not AML. So really, no surprise that they have done that. We believe that GB has stated that they intend to restart the mine about the end of April. Before they can restart the mine they have to resolve two issues: 1. The ownership and, 2. The lease of the mine, which I think is held by AML. I am sure GB knows this, so that would indicate that he expects these two issues to be sorted out by the end of April. If they are not sorted, they won't be able to restart the mine, IMO.

The whole saga beggars belief! And indeed, you may well be right that AIM had put special conditions in place just because it was FT.

Timis: The more I read about this guy, the more I wonder why on earth I bought shares in a company that he was involved in!

This article makes no sense whatsoever. Just take a look at some of the companies registered on AIM - some of them are capitalised at just a few million. And if they are talking about cash at the bank, quite honestly there are not that many companies with $50 million or more cash. So I just understand what this article is talking about.

I like the sound of Clarion Solicitors, Leeds. It seems they did a brilliant job for the Cattles shareholders, but they will probably be expensive. I'm hoping that within a few days it will be clear how many of the petitioners are willing to stick with this group and take it forward. I am certainly in favour of taking it as far as we can.