Member Info for senseman

Rodney - the quality & scope of the Opinion suggests the author is a well-instructed insolvency specialist Counsel. Is this correct?

I have been unable to find any relevant flaw. It erudites a far cruder lay summary I was for several days working up the juice to post to pull all the threads together but thankfully now don't have to attempt. It has pulled all threads together

Corry put it succinctly days ago - the benefit of having others peer- edit one's thoughts to arrive at as consensus a complete whole as possible. I have appreciated the efforts of those who re-trawled through the weighty scheme docs - I don't lose sight that many hrs can sail by getting a handle on them.

The first job has been to get a proper handle on where we are at. The second is figuring out if anything can be done to ensure the administrator has it's head screwed on properly and doesn't screw up

And to hammer the point so it is not missed - the administrator will decide what if anything is sold - NOT Soosi. The administrator will, upon the mess being sorted and debts paid, return to Soosi what if anything is left of State Oil.

Unless I am missing something, the administrator has carte blanche over the sale of any & all Soosi (State Oil ie. Prax parent) ltd companies (to the extent that all insolvency determined debts are paid) IF evidence of fraudulent or wrongful trading is found in said insolvent companies. Thus crucials appear to be - i) did Soosi keep running the refinery knowing it to be insolvent? ii) did Soosi shovel money between various Prax arms, ie not keep all ltd arms separate?. IF Times is correct i) yes - lied to gov, NEDs sacked Soosis (belatedly, to save own skin?), Soosis disappeared, etc ii) don't know, however if i) is yes what, given human nature, are chances of ii) not being yes?

Ned - sorry, you are dancing on the head of a pin. Your start position weeks ago when it kicked off was nothing occurring at Prax refinery could or would affect other Prax arms because all arms were separate entity ltd companies, ie no chance of contagion. You have morphed (under weight of evidence) to 'if they have been naughty their personal assets may be at risk'. My position on day 1 was they have been naughty, contagion will spread, all Prax arms are at sale risk because Soosis (the naughties) are 100% owners of all. Hence I will advise the forum any developments I find. How did I know? The usual reason - I am a polymath and instantly knew refineries dont go bust in a day, nor do administrators (Teneo) shut down companies and issue powerful statements on day 1 without evidence of months of prior financial skulduggery.

For benefit of all (particularly ned) - obtain by googling ' Is limited company A protected if limited company B (same owner) has been found cooking the books & is bankrupt' or by clicking link

"Generally, a limited company (Company A) is protected from the liabilities of another limited company (Company B), even if they share the same owner, due to the principle of separate legal entity. However, if the owner of both companies is found to have engaged in fraudulent or wrongful trading, or has provided a personal guarantee for Company B's debts, then their personal assets could be at risk, and Company A's protection could be compromised.

Limited Liability:

A key benefit of a limited company structure is limited liability. This means the company is a separate legal entity from its owners, and the owners are generally not personally liable for the company's debts.

Separate Legal Entity:

Each limited company, regardless of shared ownership, is considered a distinct legal entity. Therefore, the debts and liabilities of Company B, even if it's bankrupt and its owner is found to have engaged in wrongdoing, do not automatically transfer to Company A.

Exceptions to Limited Liability:

While limited liability provides a strong shield, it's not absolute. There are exceptions where directors can be held personally liable for company debts:

Personal Guarantees: If the owner of both companies signed a personal guarantee for Company B's debts, they would be personally liable for those debts regardless of the limited liability protection.

Wrongful Trading: If the owner continued trading Company B even when it was clearly insolvent and knew it was unlikely to pay its debts, they could be held liable for wrongful trading.

Fraudulent Trading: If the owner engaged in fraudulent activities to deliberately avoid paying creditors, they could be held liable for fraudulent trading, which can have severe consequences, including imprisonment.

Misconduct: Other forms of misconduct, such as preferential payments to certain creditors or illegal dividends, could also lead to personal liability.

Impact on Company A:

If the owner of Company A is found to have engaged in wrongful or fraudulent trading, or has signed personal guarantees for Company B, then Company A's assets could be at risk. Additionally, if the owner faces bankruptcy due to Company B's failure, it could impact their ability to manage and operate Company A.

In summary, while limited liability offers protection, it's not a foolproof defense against the consequences of fraudulent or wrongful trading, or personal guarantees. The specific circumstances of each case will determine the extent of liability and the impact on both the owner and the other limited company.

https://www.google.com/search?q=is+limited+company+A+protected+if+limited+company+B+(same+owner)+been+found+cooking+the+books+and+is+bankrupt%3F&rlz=1C1CHBD_en-GBGB882GB882&oq=is+limited+company+A+protected+if+limited+company+B+(sa

Ned - Thank you for affirming I am allowed to continue posting - I trust the graceful apology is in the post. However your snide persistence in employing the sobriquet 'obsessive' is worrying because i) mud sticks - hence be careful when throwing that it is 'truthful' mud ii) your definition of 'obsessive' is reasonable man's normal 'due diligence' iii) you just didn't like me posting public-domain articles upsetting your view - 'obsession' was just your attack weapon iv) the forum/PIs owe my due diligence a huge historical debt v) the forum is now dominated by discussion of issues raised by the very articles you objected to me posting. So Ned - cease snide attacks. If you don't, I will cease being polite.

As to whose 'overview' of the Prax/HUR position is correct (your real beef) - that is a separate matter. I am not an insolvency lawyer hence invited open discussion because my knowledge is limited and lay - as is yours. But you seem intent on winning battles rather than mutual view-exchange benefitting all. And yes - I do know what a limited company is - but you do not know the extent to which, and in what circumstances, protection is limited - I suggest you learn. Teneo (appointed insolvency experts) do - hence their public statement that buyers were being sought for all Prax arms.

Ye God's, Ned - please put the whisky & ego down long enough to think coherently!

i) I repeat YET AGAIN I chastised you only for calling me obsessive in reporting knock-on effects of Prax refinery downfall - hence you trying to shut down my or anyone's future reporting on such matters. By that yardstick (ie. had I been intimidated), I would not have reported the collapse of Prax transport, nor the Sunday Times article others have found so helpful given that, with the usual caveats, it likely portrays an accurate picture. get it? - littlened does NOT dictate to the forum what it may report on! But since you insist on pretending the issue is, when it is not, that I disagreed with your view of the limited implications of the Prax refinery collapse, I also address that issue - I think your view is nonsense. From the Sunday Times:-

ii) "Meanwhile, insolvency practitioners from Teneo were appointed as administrators to Prax’s parent entity, State Oil Limited..........That means that its consultants, working on behalf of the government’s Official Receiver, are now free to consider sales options for the Lindsey refinery and associated companies.......Teneo has a far larger job. It is now preparing the rest of Soosaipillai’s sprawling network of companies for sale. "

iii) You keep stating 'only if....etc.' Since the Soosis don't have £550 million (£250 mill tax + £300 mill bank loan) sitting in their current account to pay State oil (Prax) debts, but their assets (ie Prax companies) are, apart from their £4.5 mill house, their only means to pay, I am at a loss to see how they can pay this money without at least some Prax assets having to be sold (by Teneo the court appointed insolvency practitioners, not the Soosis)

Rather than further bore the forum, I suggest we agree to differ and leave it at that. I have no wish for us to fall out.

Ned - please stop being naughty. You were chided only for inappropriately labelling 'obsessive' those reporting on other Prax arms failing - when that info is crucial to whether Prax upstream is sold. So far Prax refinery & Prax transport have gone bust, & some Prax petrol stations are in trouble as the refinery is requesting cash upfront before delivery. Corry hasn't called anyone obsessive hence what you wrote is not the same as he has written .

Rod - am sure folk will welcome reading - all info is good when blind. Each 1p back from DCU's is worth circa £4 million total to holders (2p - £8 million). I reckon there is circa 0.6p - 0.7p oil already produced.

I don't surrender hope until the fat lady sings and we are not there yet. Miracles occur. But the difference between Times 2021 wrong call was that it was a judgement call (they were unaware of the strength of CA legal case nor that hundreds of PIs had written to Zacharoli who diarised a whole afternoon to read them). Whereas the recent article is principally factual reporting not judgement call.

It would help if, rather than cry, folk pragmatise. Eg. could a bright spark tell me if the S/Times article is fire-walled, or readable to all? Because it is more powerful & informative than a 50% cut & paste - detailing better how Soolis fooled & lied to many, incl gov. If it is behind firewall I can cut & paste whole article if folk ask - if folk thereafter don't pee me off by screaming 'obsessive'.

By the way, State Oil (Prax parent) has a $300 million outstanding debt to a group of banks headed by HSBC. It commenced early 2024, replacing a $300 million loan due for payback then. They will, as well as HMRC, want their money.

Laser will shortly report an offload which will send out 'DCU money already in bank & due us ' total circa 0.6p-0.7p p.sh. Please could wise heads/legals/accountants amongst us direct their minds towards what seems to be the presenting questions - (i) what right do we have to that money if Prax upstream is sold? (ii) what right do we have to 17.5% of Prax upstream sale proceeds? Mindful that Prax parent and/or & Prax refinery debts may exceed all sums received from sale of all Prax arms

Key S.Times takes:

i) Teneo appointed solely raise finance save refinery. Saw books, said 'too late, you're bust.' Prax NEDs sack both Soosis. Inference - Soosis hiding info from NEDs/cooking books many months. Teneo announce bankruptcy + investigate Soosi/all Prax

ii) Soosis uncontactable, poss fled to Dubai

iii) All Prax arms for sale (to pay HMRC £250mill?). Laggan/Total deal gone.

iv) 100% owners Soosis autocratic style highlighted (see further article excerpt below). Jennifer - is article link behind firewall, or readable?

" Throughout this time, and flanked by his wife, Sanjeev retained an iron grip on his company. “He is energetic, charismatic, and very charming,” said one person that worked with him. The problem was that he was either unable or unwilling to delegate, they said. “I was surprised how he surrounded himself with less capable people,” the person added. “He wants to do everything. The answer would always be: ‘I’ll fix it.’” "

"PRAX IN TATTERS: HOW A BRITISH HUSBAND & WIFE'S $10 BILLION OIL EMPIRE IMPLODED

The secretive energy group ballooned into one the UK’s biggest. We reveal the inside story of how it was spectacularly undone by a deal too far. The reclusive couple’s empire unravelled in spectacular fashion last week when it declared bankruptcy after being pursued by HMRC for £250 million in unpaid taxes. Rumours abound that they have fled the country. “Sanjeev Kumar Soosaipillai no longer works for the Prax Group” and “Arani Kumar Soosaipillai no longer works for the Prax Group” were the automated emailed responses in response to efforts by The Sunday Times to contact them for comment.

And it can this weekend be revealed that Britain was just a whisker away from handing over another major strategic asset to the couple. Prax had exchanged contracts with French oil major Total to acquire its interests in the West of Shetland gas fields. This included the Shetland Gas Plant, which is responsible for producing about 8 per cent of the UK’s gas needs, enough for two million homes, according to Total. The deal had been due to complete in the final week of June, just days before administrators and receivers intervened.

Teneo has a far larger job. It is now preparing the rest of Soosaipillai’s sprawling network of companies for sale. It is understood that Teneo was first contacted by the company just four days before it collapsed into bankruptcy. Originally, the consultancy was asked to assist with raising new financing. Within hours, Teneo’s team realised they were dealing with a group that was not financially viable. Sanjeev initially worked with Teneo before being suspended from his post by Prax’s non-executives ahead of the group’s insolvency. Teneo is understood to have opened a forensic investigation into Soosaipillai’s actions as a company director. The likes of Lancaster offshore oil field west of the Shetland basin, bought as part of the takeover of AIM-quoted Hurricane Energy for £250 million in early 2023, is likely to attract suitors. Control of Total’s Shetland assets, so close to becoming part of the group, have reverted back to the French oil giant. "

The above is perhaps 50% of the article (I copied & pasted) as, though the link to the full article is below, The Times is usually firewalled. Elsewhere it is reported the Soosis are believed to be in Dubai and all emails and phone calls from UK officials/authorities have been ignored.

https://www.thetimes.com/business-money/companies/article/how-did-the-soosaipillais-10bn-oil-empire-collapse-89wnm8m0l

From Telegraph Business - getting stranger

"Hunt for owner of oil refinery that collapsed owing taxman £250m

Sanjeev Soosaipillai accused of abandoning business and staff as officials admit whereabouts unknown"

Be careful Laser - you've posted yet another of your regular offload updates. Quickly followed by yet another 'Prax company in admin' post. The street rumour is that a small group of nutters intend to approach your GP to have you sectioned under the Mental Health Act for chronic OCD syndrome ...........))))).

Thanks Dive - though I fear it is akin to getting the flat earth society to address reality.

Ned - you call me obsessive for having the consideration to appraise the forum a 2nd Prax arm has gone bust, and I am 'rude' for calling you out? Don't be silly. At a stroke, should tomorrow a 3rd Prax arm go bust, you have made all wary of informing the forum, for fear of being labelled obsessive. By your yardstick Jockbob11, who thoughtfully on 30 June 09.43am first appraised all that Prax refinery had gone bust, is obsessive. As is Laser, who on 30 June 09.43am reported court appointed administrator Teneo's comment ie:

'Clare Boardman, from Teneo, said administrators would be "considering all options for the group, including the prospect of a sale for the group's upstream business and retail operations in the UK and Europe, all of which remain outside of insolvency". '

Now. if the administrator has ref-flagged a prospect of Prax upstream being sold, and from that a 10 year old could extrapolate that collapse of other Prax arms increases that risk hence merits reporting on the forum, why can't you?

Lastly, JenniferE 8 July 18.27pm correctly opined sale of Prax upstream 'a very bad option' for DCU holders. Do simple maths. Prax effectively bought HUR for nothing - 6p of our own already banked cash + 6.5p from future oil sales. But being charitable let's say 12.5p x 2 billion shares = £250 mill. With 2+ years less oil in P6 & the Aoka Mizu on borrowed time, what chance is there of a buyer coughing up circa £377 million UPFRONT CASH for Prax upstream IN A FIRE SALE, which is needed for DCU holders to see the current 3.3p DCU shortfall to raise us to 12.5p?

The above was already evident via forum comment. Refusing to accept reality and having a pop at me won't change anything. The 3 fools who 'recommended' your inappropriate comment will be similar reality-avoiders or the usual suspects who will support anyone having a pop at me. Not a one has yet admitted getting things wrong. Ideally we all want the administrator to nudge the regulator to OK ing the Laggan/Total deal as a financially sound way of stabilising Prax parent. Headwinds against that are how much the Soosis have been manipulating the books and their remaining credibility.

Apology - should read 12.5p

Ned - ???? - in 2023 you considered the HUR sale good, Prax reliable and 12.5% probable. No one is obsessed. Many have expressed concern about Prax upstream being affected. It is a distinct possibility (we hope otherwise) that Prax upstream have already lost the Laggan/Total deal because of Prax refinery collapsing - if so Prax upstream and we have already been significantly affected. The Prax refinery collapse has already caused Prax transport to collapse. Prax is a private company 80% owned by the Soosis and 20% owned by Soosi trusts. Are you so dumb or being deliberately obtuse that you genuinely fail to see the potential for the Soosis needing to take, or being forced to take by the administrator, drastic action to stabilise the whole Prax empire?

I suggest you re-read the myriad comments posted by others since the Prax refinery to understand how ignorant and inappropriate your comment is

Https://news.sky.com/story/two-week-deadline-set-to-find-buyer-for-ailing-lindsey-oil-refinery-13394141

Remainder of article

"Axis tanker drivers were paid to transport fuel from the site in north Lincolnshire — one of only five remaining refineries in the UK — to petrol station forecourts operated by Prax and other customers, including supermarkets and Newcastle airport. The collapse of the delivery firm has led to redundancies for its 137 employees.

A City source told The Times that drivers working for Axis had been unable to access supplies from the Lindsey oil refinery after it was placed in the hands of the official receiver last week.

The source said: “The two companies are interdependent and so it’s no longer financially viable to operate. There will be no money coming in.

“The administrators came and liquidated it and have ring-fenced the refinery. Obviously, then the drivers can’t access the fuel to fill the tankers up. So they were asked to stay at home. They were told on Friday that potentially they could be getting back up and running this week, but then it has all blown up.”

Restructuring advisers at Teneo were appointed to run Axis when the wider Prax Group collapsed. Teneo has been handling the management of the Prax Group entities, including the group’s retail and upstream operations, which sit outside the remit of the taxpayer-backed receivership.

In a statement on Tuesday, Teneo said: “[Axis] has suffered operational challenges as a result of the wider group insolvencies and has been placed into administration. Unfortunately, after carefully assessing all available options, the administrators concluded it is not possible to continue to trade the Axis business.”

From times article

"The $10 billion energy empire founded by husband-and-wife British entrepreneurs has suffered a new blow after its transport business, which ferries fuel from a refinery to petrol station forecourts around the UK, fell into administration.

Axis Logistics, the transport operation of the Prax Group, has been cut off from accessing fuel from the company’s Lindsey oil refinery after the facility in Humberside was placed into administration by the government last week, sources told The Times.

The Department for Energy Security and Net Zero said on Tuesday night that the Lindsey oil refinery had resumed fuel deliveries adding: “The official receiver is ensuring continued safe operations at the site, while options, including a potential sale, are explored.” "

From today's times. another prax arm - prax's delivery company (from insolvent refinery to prax's retail petrol stations/sites) gone bust also, as administrator won't let fuel be removed without payment, and prax hasn't got cash to pay?

"Fuel transport arm of Prax Group falls into administration

Axis Logistics, which ferries fuel from the Lindsey oil refinery to petrol station forecourts, stops trading"

will this mean prax retail forecourts run out of fuel supplies so the retail arm will soon go bust also?

will this mean