Member Info for PuzzledPete

7 'recommendations' here are deluded. Any auditor 'considering' whether to take on QDE won't even have talked to Crowe about why they resigned. And that there has been no section 519 announcement (even to Companies House) a week after the strict deadline. indicates something rather more serious than normal. A new auditor will therefore be very careful to go all through the cos history - which isn't reassuring.

And anyone could list more than one set of investors with cause to sue, from the latest 2.6p placees, to the N American investors left high and dry by the misleading ramping material circulated by Fairfax (who might also have cause having passed on PK's exaggerations) which caused the warrants spike . At the last count there were nearly 50m shares still registered with N American dealers/broker platforms which will be those who didn't get out after the original pre-paid warrant holders took their eyewatering profits.

Oh and I see 'Trying to make a buck'. Thats your sole aim. No attempt to understand how you can better ensure doing that. Treating investment like a couple of nights at the dogs no doubt. No wonder anyone posting what you can't understand strikes you as 'pompous'. As Dud and Pete would have said. Go and take a shufti somewhere dangerous. Don't come back.

Pomposity Mr Saloon ? Been here less than a month and shovelled out 227 gobs of drivel already. And shown you understand nothing of this company. That's 'pomposity' methinks. I post facts for the intelligent wanting to understand. And when I see a farcical Laurel and Hardy moment displayed for all to see - I mention it. As for you, I suggest you take your ignorant and 'pompous' opinions back to where they came from. Then this board will be free for those discussing matters intelligently.

They never learn.

I envision them as a bunch of clowns trying and keep falling off and trying again to jump on the rickety QDE jalopy gathering speed down a rocky slope to a vast chasm below - all the while shouting 'it'll turn round and shoot back up - up -up up

In this case perhaps we can take it that the co might incriminate i tself !

Coming Back ? By the way. Do tell us (or ask the professionally qualified or investment experienced Roast numpties - oops ! You mean they are neither ?) how will QDE lift its suspension by July if the accounts (necessary before suspension is lifted) from the new auditor will take at least 3 months and probably longer to finalise - and no auditor has been appointed yet. Even when they are they're not likely to be able to start straight away.

Just to help you, here's what AI says

A new auditor will likely take 3 to 12 months (or longer) to finalise the audit, as they cannot simply pick up where the previous auditor left off.

Key Factors Delaying the Timeline Starting from Scratch:

Professional standards require new auditors to perform their own risk assessments and gather independent evidence.

The "Risk" Red Flag: The outgoing auditor's resignation due to "risks" forces the incoming firm to trigger strict client-acceptance procedures and enhanced scrutiny.

Complex SPVs: Unraveling Special Purpose Vehicles requires extensive testing of off-balance-sheet exposures, asset valuations, and complex legal structures.

Debt and Borrowings: The missed deadline will likely trigger immediate technical defaults on borrowings, requiring the new auditor to review covenant breaches and going-concern viability.

Predecessor Clearance: The new firm must formally communicate with the resigned auditor to understand the exact nature of the risks, a process that can take weeks if legal teams get involved.

Oh and one more thing. If a suspension lasts more than six months, the FCA usually cancels the listing.

I'm sure the Roast Numpties will know what that means for shareholders. Especially for those it has 'advised' so professionally.

WE wait with bated breath.

So why don't those 'chatting' have any QDE shares Mr Zen. ? Has the answer never occurred to you ? Is your level of comprehension even lower that Never Maidit's ? Tell us how many shares YOU have, and what you paid for them.

"Sunday Roast know what they're talking about" ! Yet more proof of your crtetinism. Full details of the warrants with timetables and amounts were posted along with the prospectus. And Sunday Roast it was droolingly opined QDE would be 'getting over £300m income'. How old are you Maidit ? Are you still in kindergarten ? - not yet got into the backward 'numbers' class ? - let alone the 'My First John and Jane nursery book".

Care to say what they are b_t ?

Alternatively you can cast pearls before swine.

Correction. I mean of course Pyebridges' loan from Riverfort Not the other way round.

And we're now well past the 10 days suspension when a lender can pull the plug, and that means Riverfort's c £1.5-2 million owing to Pyebridge. When it's claimed immediately plus penalties, in the same ruthless way Riverfort has treated others of its creditors (see Eqtec) it will put the rest of QDE even further in hock and maybe confiscate its one and only Pyebridge 'flagship'.

2)

On top of those obstacles is that QDE now can't continue trading as before.

For a start, investors in the £1 million share placing at 2.6p on 23 April only a week before the auditor walked away and when PK must have known he was arguing with Crowe about the accounts, must have strong grounds to sue for misrepresentation, non-disclosure of price-sensitive information, or market manipulation (see the way the shares gyrated on the announcement). At the least that means The £1 million it was relying on won't now be forthcoming, meaning QDE might be even further into insolvency and can't complete any of the 'deals' it said it had up its sleeve.

On top

is that, now that doubt has been cast over QDE's finances, no sensible company will sign a deal with it. So its almost certainly goodbye to PK's fanciful Walter Mitty plans, where there was no chance in Hell anyway that an AI company would trust such a tiny, inexperienced, outfit permanently teetering on insolvency with delivering a reliable power supply.

Even if, by some incredibly unlikely miracle, PK persuades another lot of deluded 'investors' to back new contracts he might say will be signed if he has the cash, current shareholders will be totally wiped out by the even heavier dilution than they've suffered already.

I wonder what its like to be dim; unable to understand what's going on around you; completely unable to understand what's been told you and that you could verify yourself; reduced to constantly babbling the same gibberish 'its coming back', its coming back', and unable to recognise a dead parrot, like Never MaidIt. I suppose he's happy playing with his toys though.

For grown-ups, it's plain QDE won't come back. Its not just finding a new auditor. Its because suspension itself has badly damaged, if not totally killed, its prospects. And it has now been in breach of market regulations putting it at risk of much closer investigation than up to now.

Only one breach has been the serious failure to inform shareholders in time of the reasons why Crowe resigned. QDE is one of those categories of complex structured companies that can't get away with just sayi g the auditor thought to risky to continue acting. It has to be specific.

And we're now well past the 10 days suspension when a lender can pull the plug, and that means Riverfort's c £1.5-2 million owing to Pyebridge. When it's claimed immediately plus penalties, in the same ruthless way Riverfort has treated others of its creditors (see Eqtec) it will put the rest of QDE even further in hock and maybe confiscate its one and only Pyebridge 'flagship'.

While anyone can work out at least two reasons why Crowe resigned, they don't seem so unsurmountable for QDE to risk being suspended and losing its whole business, so there must be others more serious.

Just those obvious two are

1) Crowe refusing to sign off the 'going concern' reassurance in the same way it has believed QDRE's promises in previous years that 'it has ways of raising funds' - when few of them have materialised including the hope of even more equity when the last one was the desperate pre--paid warrants wheeze which partly failed and certainly can't be repeated.

2) Disagreement over Pyebridge's accounting treatment where PK has been pretending its revenues come to QDE when they don't, and therefore wants to 'consolidate' it so that pretence can appear in the accounts (even though not changing the reality) but that if it does Riverfort's loan will also have to be consolidated, putting QDE even further into negative working capital and probably in breach of other covenants.

Also possible is that Crowe has uncovered details of PK's payments to Fairfax being used to put up all the fake press puffs that spiked the shares to absurdly impossible levels last summer, making a favoured few a vast profit, and the investors sucked in (including it seems our dim friend) vast losses. In that case PK will have (been proved to have) committed an imprisonable fraud.

On top of those obstacles is that QDE now can't continue trading as before.

(continued)

Correct b-t. Reasons tomorrow

Continued

So there is scope here for PK to use his usual slithery tactics to try to avoid telling shareholders the whole story. But its likely to fail eventually. Meanwhile it seems shareholders will have to wait while he wriggles on the hook

Is a 'reassessment of the risks' ? an adequate explanation for an auditor's resignation under section 519Yes, a "reassessment of the risks" is considered a legally adequate explanation for an auditor's resignation under Section 519 of the UK Companies Act 2006, provided it accurately reflects the reason for ceasing to hold office.However, its practical adequacy depends heavily on the type of company being audited and the specific expectations of UK regulatory bodies

Statutory Requirement: Under Section 519, the auditor must outline the actual reasons and any connected matters that should be brought to the attention of members or creditors.Public Filings: Audit firms frequently use versions of this phrasing (e.g., "reassessment of the risks related to auditing the company and concluding that they were not willing to continue to act") in formal London Stock Exchange RNS announcements and Companies House filings.FRC and ICAEW Standpoint: While legally valid, the Financial Reporting Council (FRC) and the ICAEW actively push for more informative resignation statements. Boilerplate language can hide critical context regarding governance issues, disagreements over accounting treatments, or scope limitations.

However for public cos like QDE "The auditor must explicitly state the reasons for leaving, even if they are standard commercial or risk-based adjustments."

If the "reassessment of risk" is driven by hidden internal fraud, a severe breakdown in internal controls, or aggressive management behavior, using this phrase as a generic shield without further context can be deemed a breach of professional transparency.Successor Auditor Communication: Irrespective of the brief wording used in the Section 519 public statement, the outgoing auditor is still ethically required to provide a complete, unvarnished disclosure of all relevant risk factors during the professional clearance process with the incoming audit firm.

This is a complicated co using special purpose vehicles in which all its earning activities are contained and financed mostly by outsiders and banks. Its treatment accounting is likely to be open to argument

Based on this complex structure involving Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs) and external debt financing, a generic phrase like "reassessment of the risks" is highly likely to draw immediate regulatory and investor scrutiny. When accounting treatments are highly debatable, using vague language in a Section 519 statement risks breaching statutory duties. Regulatory and Legal ImplicationsFRC Enforcement Risk: The Financial Reporting Council (FRC) actively penalises auditors who fail to provide clear, informative resignation statements. If the actual reason for resigning is a dispute over SPV accounting, hiding behind generic "risk" language violates Section 519 obligations. Duty to Members and Creditors: Section 519 mandates that auditors explicitly detail any matters that should be brought to the attention of stakeholders.

Has a section 519 notice been issued re Crowe llp resignation as QDE's auditor ? when must it be ?

Yes, a Section 519 notice has already been issued regarding the unexpected resignation of Crowe UK LLp

Status: Crowe UK LLP submitted the Section 519 notification. Quantum Data Energy PLC (QDE) confirmed receipt of this statutory statement on 29 April 2026.

Content: The notification served to end their office with immediate effect. This disrupted the publication of QDE's accounts for the year ended 31 December 2025. No adverse findings or explicit reasons for the exit were initially disclosed within QDE's regulatory announcement.

(Doesn't mean PK wasn't given the reasons)

Under Section 516 and Section 519 of the UK Companies Act 2006:Auditor Deadline: The resigning auditor must deposit the Section 519 statement of circumstances (or a statement that there are no such circumstances) at the company's registered office at the exact same time they deliver their formal notice of resignation. For a public interest entity or listed company like QDE, the resignation is not legally effective until this statement is attached.

Company Deadline: Once received, the company must send a copy of the Section 519 statement to its shareholders and creditors within 14 days of deposit, unless they successfully apply to a court to declare the statement defamatory or abusive.

No Filing: There are no regulatory filings or public notices indicating that QDE has sought a court order to block or challenge the auditor's statement.

So, 15 days on, no announcement of any sort from PK. Nothing deposited yet at Companies House.

Yet another failure to follow the rules

Maybe PK has done a bunk back to Seth Efrica from where he (and his Kibo mentor Coetzee) brought their distant relationship with the truth. All my own speculation Yer 'onour

True 4P Tiny it is ! Never occurred to him that anyone wanting a double identity wouldn't make it similar to the first.

Where did you find that statement Monty ? Its not the more specific explanation the rules call for - so I'm still waiting for the section 519 announcement. The rules seem to say 1) specific reasons should have been given to QDE along with the resignation letter and 2) those reasons should be passed on to shareholders within 2 weeks. Of course, going by that letter, PK might just post to shareholders without making a public announcement - I don't know.