Member Info for Toffers

Don't worry friendsps, I wouldn't come to you for financial advice that is for sure!

Anyone taking bets?

company pay up

company don't pay up, notification in the gazette occurs, bank freezes bank accounts.

company try to injunct the WUP and succeed

company try to injunct the WUP and don't succeed

Symmonds and Symmonds remove themselves as acting in the Queeld/Mispare case

does the Queeld/Mispare case go ahead next week or not?

does the Nomad resign and suspension occurs?

does suspension occur anyway due to a disorderly market tomorrow?

does suspension occur before 8am so as to prevent a massive drop in sp and buy the company time?

do Queeld and Mispare decide to join in with the WUP?

do IKN and crew decide to raise the 108k plus costs instead?!

Can't wait!

You check it IKN, but you know you can't without a case number! and even then it's protected as it happens.

11 July friendsps you posted - "Look at my history, I like CTC/Scuba work in financial services (I genuinely do). Live in Northern Ireland." - so I was close enough without looking back. Funny how you seem to know very little though as you stated this morning when you thanked me for clarification on the process. I would have thought you would have known been in the professional position that you supposedly are!

You at 10.35 - "Thanks for the clarification of process Toffers."

Now you're up to your usual tricks again and calling everything I say in to question.

An accountant should have the answers, but you seem to be clueless.

Https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part06#6.15

Oh and I missed out the FCA and FRC, yes, but the FCA was not here, that was on cloudtag.

Careful friendsps you admitted this morning you had got this wrong, now you're back to your old ways again.

Yes, I have less than 100 shares.

Yes, I lost a six figure sum which I'm far from happy about.

Yes, I've had an order to serve someone by whatsapp back in 2018 as it happens.

Yes, I have a battery issue on my keyboard and must replace them but I keep forgetting.

In the past 24 hours I've posted links to try and help people understand the severity of the situation which is more than you have done, despite you saying that allegedly you are an accountant! You seem to know very little as it happens.

The court might opt to allow service post, or delivery personally via bailiffs, or another means permitted by the CPR (court rules), which might include fax or electronic means, potentially, although it may potentially require the consent of the defendant.

Bearing in mind time is of the essence here, as a hearing will be listed quickly, it will be a matter for the Judge as to how the company and/or individual directors are served no doubt.

I've not seen the papers so I've no idea how they were served. They could have been served by process server on the same day as issue but left unopened until Friday! Makes no difference in reality. They've clearly been served.

Why would I be pointing out the severity of what has happened here if I was holding a fist full of shares like the TG crew keep suggesting, including you now? It wouldn't make sense. I'd be trying to protect my investment. I've virtually no shares, certainly under 100, so it matters not to me that they will probably be wound up as a company, not a jot, or that they could be suspended tomorrow before 8am open!

Friendsps, papers can be served on the directors personally.

You really think that was me? prove it! might be my handle but wasn't necessarily me!

Https://www.pinsentmasons.com/out-law/news/high-court-allows-service-of-court-papers-by-whatsapp

Wandsworth County Couort made an order for me personally that I could serve someone by whatsapp, so it is possible.

7 working days could theoretically be as soon as tomorrow, so an announcement could appear in the gazette tomorrow, depending of course on how service was effected, but the court might have allowed service by whatsapp or email on the same day of the WUP being issued, which appears to have been 25 October by all accounts. Wouldn't trust CS on dates, he probably only opened the email or whatsapp on Friday!

Looks like ragsrob has been reincarnated yet again, this time with a rosette no less to try and keep himself safe!

"Section 122 of the IA 86 sets out the grounds on which a company may be wound up by the court.

The court will generally accept that a company is unable to pay its debts where it is shown that:

A statutory demand has been served for an undisputed sum exceeding £750 and the company has failed to pay the sum due within three weeks; or

The company is unable to pay its debts as they fall due; or

The value of the company's assets is less than the amount of its liabilities."

same source

Recap time courtesy of Gowlings website -

"A creditor may choose to issue a WUP if it has been unsuccessful in recovering an undisputed debt of at least £750 and it can prove that the company is unable to pay its debts as and when they fall due, or that the company is balance sheet insolvent (as defined by section 123 of the IA 86).

Winding up proceedings should only be commenced if the debt can be proven and there is no dispute as to whether it is due. If the debt is genuinely disputed, or the company has a genuine cross-claim or right of set-off, winding up proceedings are not appropriate. The court will dismiss any petition that is issued when the debt is genuinely disputed and the issuer will generally have to pay the company's costs of responding to the proceedings - on the basis that they should not have been issued in the first place.

While the threat or issuing of a WUP may put pressure on a company to pay an outstanding debt, winding up proceedings should not be seen as a debt collection process for individual creditors. Rather, they should be seen as a mechanism for putting an insolvent debtor into a collective form of insolvency proceedings for the benefit of all creditors."

Richard I am relaxed, I have virtually no shares, so no worry for me, I sold them between 16p and 12p, but would have sold much sooner had the company not concealed the Queeld/Mispare proceedings!

Friendsps read Gowlings advice on their own site. I don't think the company have much wriggle room, do you?! Gowlings will have needed to make sure the debt was owing and sound, somewhatgullible has confirmed what I stated this morning, a Judge will want to see evidence as to the debt and why it hasn't been paid and all the steps taken to try and secure it prior to the WUP petition, and sight of the company's financial position. It will also be sceptical about why the company haven't done anything to defend it prior to the WUP! The company had 400k left at the end of June, the chances are there is nothing in the coffers now. Not a good scenario at all. It might all be pie in the sky anyway if the Nomad walks as he's unlikely to get paid soon no doubt and then suspension will occur anyway. I suspect the company will be glad to avoid the Queeld case, they will probably have to bring Dmitry in to give evidence, as Queeld/Mispare have probably asked for his attendance. Ouch! my views.