Member Info for Toffers

Nathdomb I think that was the amount given on the rns at the time, look back to where I posted it yesterday, it was around 260k from memory.

Outofreach, you need to get your head around FRC and FCA, they are two different bodies you fool.

I haven't said I haven't made a complaint. I have said there is a complaint to the FRC as far as I am aware, and yes, I have now said it was me that made it, and I have always said I made a complaint to the FCA about the cloudtag shenanigans, so stop twisting things outofreach, you're out of your depth.

That shoudl say p.u.s.s.y.

hey *****, you say your advice is to green box like you do, yet you were the one attacking me first thing this morning! oh the irony!

Owed, really must change the batteries in my keyboard!

Let's get some facts straight shall we.

Gowlings are wed money by the company.

The company didn't pay so Gowlings would have issued a statutory demand a few weeks ago yet the company didn't tell investors of this.

The company still didn't pay or dispute the matter so Gowlings issued a winding up petition and served it on the company.

DR then notifies everyone here of the winding up petition, which was kind of him!

The company then waits until the end of the day to confirm what they term as 'speculation' but in fact was already fact, to investors that they are aware of the action and intend to take legal advice. Therefore, currently, the matter remains UNDISPUTED as they have done nothing about it.

Next step for Gowlings will be that the advert will go in to the Gazette, and once that is seen by the bank, they will freeze the companys monies held in any bank accounts here, if there are indeed any!

Meanwhile, as already stated, the company have done nothing, despite them having been aware of all of this for weeks. Why? The short answer would be because they have no sodding funds!

They owe monies for the Rosgeo mining licence affairs 'by November 2023' which is now, otherwise they will lose the licence, and that requires around 260k+, so what's the score? they pay the licence fee because that involves assets in Russia which are out of the jurisdiction of the court here, and then trade over there and abandon here? or trade in Cyprus, as they already have subsidiary companies in Cyprus and abandon here?

The short answer is, having let it get this far, they either pay up or get wound up. DS won't loan any monies, he's already lost enough, or has he? because millions are held offshore that were raised from shareholders for the Rosgeo JV which didn't happen. They have access to that money but shareholders don't and no one in the UK does, as it's out of the jurisdiction.

What I'm interested in is whether Queeld and Mispare will now throw any more money at this and apply for injunctive relief tomorrow on an urgent ex parte application to the High Court? Their lawyers may have spoken to Gowlings and got the low down, so they may not bother if its likely the winding up hearing will be heard very shortly, which I'm almost sure it will be. The company could try and stay the proceedings, but a Judge is going to ask why they didn't respond in a timely manner in the first place, and will probably ask to see proof of funds, which could be a tricky one, so I see little hope of a stay as things are.

So imo this is about as bottoms up as you can get! And yet again, they've shafted investors with their total incompetence.

My views.

You simply can't defend it, it's the worse position ever the company could be in, if that notice goes in the gazette within the next few days, the bank will see it and freeze the accounts to protect the bank and any creditors as it has a duty to do so. That means no one gets paid anything in the interim, and the Nomad won't get paid. Is he going to work for free? Highly unlikely. So if the Nomad doesn't get paid, suspension occurs. Unless, of course, the Nomad is paid from another source, but that is bound to be queried. It's serious.

Bobby the statutory demand was served over 3 weeks ago and not disputed. Read about undisputed WUP's. Read the advice on Gowlings own site. The company were served with the statutory demand and did nothing, hence why the WUP was then issued and served. They should have disputed it when the statutory demand was served. They haven't disputed the fees and so that is why Gowlings issued the WUP which they were entitled to do, so it's now pay up or be wound up time!

Take my advice, it would be best if you lot keep stumm IKN, DR, bfd, TOc, bugler and the rest, for reasons I have just outlined in the previous post.

Something else for you IKN, it's not beyond the realms that the Judge hearing the Queeld/Mispare case has been reading this forum. Judges look in at all sorts these days on social media! Imagine if a Judge reads the abusive comments that you and your comrades have been making towards genuine posters who have been raising red flags here. I know what I would think if I were that Judge reading those comments here. They might also not have been aware of the Gowlings case as yet, but I bet they are now! Think on.

Yep IKN, either Gowlings will get their winding up order and the official receiver takes charge, or Symmons and Symmonds get a restraining order to prevent the removal of any remaining funds out of the jurisdiction until Queeld/Mispare has been determined. Which one I wonder? my views.

Please quote your source bobby as I have, with Gowlings. People can then read and make their own minds up.

Bobby, they issued the statutory demand and it wasn't disputed. So now the claim has been submitted as a WUP, noted as undisputed! Get a grip! If they've any money left at all, I suspect they will pay the rest of the money due this month in relation to that mining licence as per the rns I mentioned yesterday. If they don't, they will lose that mining licence no doubt! What a shambles. Not sure how the Nomad is going to be paid any further though? That in itself will cause suspension if he isn't paid!

Law society investigation, prey, what has the law society got to do with it? there's no mention of any misconduct with gowlings, so to mention law society involvement is a complete misnoma and a joke. Just goes to show how uneducated you lot are.

Oh so I'm heavily invested yet I've been pointing out red flags for some 2/3 years, well that makes sense doesn't it (NOT)! Perhaps you'd like to take it up with the FRC, as they have details?

Look back at my posting history and then you will see what a fool you are Richard. I said long ago that I was barely holding any shares, and then took the flack for posting with the crew claiming I held no shares so why was I posting. Now I'm apparently holding a million shares, which is news to me, and news to HL! You are making yourself look very silly.

Think you are right there Mr_Wolfe. Money's too tight to mention!!!! :)

Shouston, you are out of your depth.

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."

source: Gowlings.

Can you see the word "undisputed" there? or the other options?

I hold less than 100 shares Richard98, and it's none of your business regardless. You have been reported. I hope others will stand up and report also. I would copy my accounts to show but HL won't allow me to access my accounts on my PC this morning as it says someone is trying to access my accounts. I can access on my phone however, having had to input a raft of further security information which hasn't been necessary previously. I would suggest that others who are having a run in with this lot also check their accounts this morning, as clearly they are trying to access private information through web links. Please check your vpns are on and working.