vaughan45 Posted March 16, 2018 Share Posted March 16, 2018 (edited) Back to JLTRT, does anyone have any idea how many folk are out there who have pre paid for kits and who are now creditors? I have heard of two but imagine there may be quite a few more? They were still supplying goods in the second week of January as I received the two wagon kits I ordered - however the quality of the whitemetal parts in particular was not up to the usual standard, compared to kits I have received previously. Looks like they could have come from the rejects bin. Given the usual way with these things, modellers who are owed monies will usually be well down the creditors pecking order and as they were a limited company, there is likely to be only limited recovery action that can be taken against their one director.. Interestingly their listing at companies house indicates a change in company secretary only a couple of weeks before their entry into receivership. Edited March 16, 2018 by vaughan45 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Nth Degree Posted March 16, 2018 Share Posted March 16, 2018 Other things happened too before that event. The IP suddenly transferred into a new company and, in fact, the only things that were left were the debts and the old factory plant. The more you look into it the more calculated it appears to be. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Reid Posted March 16, 2018 Share Posted March 16, 2018 Back to JLTRT, does anyone have any idea how many folk are out there who have pre paid for kits and who are now creditors? I have heard of two but imagine there may be quite a few more? Imaginations played a big part in this topic. Out of interest Osgood why do you need to know how many are owed money? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Osgood Posted March 16, 2018 Share Posted March 16, 2018 Imaginations played a big part in this topic. Out of interest Osgood why do you need to know how many are owed money? Because one modeller, who has discussed his own situation with me, is trying to gauge whether he is one of a very small group or a much larger one. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium polybear Posted March 17, 2018 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 17, 2018 Other things happened too before that event. The IP suddenly transferred into a new company and, in fact, the only things that were left were the debts and the old factory plant. The more you look into it the more calculated it appears to be. I've absolutely no idea regarding business(?) law but to me that sounds to be extremely dodgy practice, if correct. It would imply that all worthwhile assets would be out of the reach of receivers/creditors. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Happy Hippo Posted March 17, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 17, 2018 I've absolutely no idea regarding business(?) law but to me that sounds to be extremely dodgy practice, if correct. It would imply that all worthwhile assets would be out of the reach of receivers/creditors. I believe it is called asset stripping , and there are companies/individuals out there who make quite a bit of money from doing so. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium jjb1970 Posted March 17, 2018 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 17, 2018 I've absolutely no idea regarding business(?) law but to me that sounds to be extremely dodgy practice, if correct. It would imply that all worthwhile assets would be out of the reach of receivers/creditors. If what we are being told is true then it would leave a very bad smell around this. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold chris p bacon Posted March 17, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 17, 2018 Other things happened too before that event. The IP suddenly transferred into a new company and, in fact, the only things that were left were the debts and the old factory plant. The more you look into it the more calculated it appears to be. Do you know the name of the company ? if not this is just a bit of hearsay. Sadly, if true it's morally wrong but not illegal. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
arran Posted March 17, 2018 Share Posted March 17, 2018 Imaginations played a big part in this topic. Out of interest Osgood why do you need to know how many are owed money? HI All Looks like hes walking away and if your owed money you might get your percentage. Now i know for some this may be hard to grasp he " Great guy Pete" would do this . Im sure it will all come out in the wash. Regards Arran JUST LIKE THE REAL THING LIMITEDCompany Number: (04552733) Registered office: Suite 5, 6 The Vine Yard, London, SE1 1QL Principal trading address: 26 Whittle Place, Irvine, KA11 4HR Notice is hereby given, pursuant to Rule 15.13 of the Insolvency (England and Wales) Rules 2016 that the Director of the above named company ("the Convener") is seeking deemed consent from the creditors on the nomination of Derek A. Jackson as Liquidator. A resolution to wind up the Company is to be considered on 1 March 2018. The decision date for any objections to be made to this proposed decision is 1 March 2018. In order to object to the proposed decision a creditor must have delivered a notice, stating that the creditor so objects, to the proposed liquidator, Derek A. Jackson of Grainger Corporate Rescue & Recovery, not later than 23.59 in the decision date. If less than the appropriate number (10% in value) of relevant creditors (defined as those who would be entitled to vote in decision procedure, if the decision had been sought in that way) object to the proposed decision, the creditors are to be treated as having made the proposed decision. A list of the names and addresses of the Company's creditors will be available for inspection, free of charge, at the Company's registered office or at Grainger Corporate Rescue & Recovery, Third Floor, 65 Bath Street, Glasgow, G2 2BX during business hours 2 days prior to the decision date. The notice of objection must be delivered together with a proof of debt in respect of the creditor's claim in accordance with the Rules failing which the objection will be disregarded. Proofs may be delivered to Grainger Corporate Rescue & Recovery, Third Floor, 65 Bath Street, Glasgow, G2 2BX. A creditor who has opted out from receiving notice may nevertheless make an objection if the creditor provides a proof of debt in the requisite time frame. The Director of the company, before the decision date and before the end of the period of 7 days beginning on the day after the day on which the company passed a resolution for winding up, is required by Section 99 of the Insolvency Act 1986: (i) to make out a statement in the prescribed form as to the affairs of the Company, and (ii) send the statement to the Company's creditors. It is the convener's responsibility to aggregate and objections to see if the threshold is met for the decision to be taken as not having been made. If the threshold is not met the deemed consent procedure will terminate and a physical meeting will be convened and held to seek a decision on the nomination. Names and address of nominated liquidator: Derek A. Jackson (IP no: 9505) of Grainger Corporate Rescue & Recovery, Third Floor, 65 Bath Street, Glasgow, G2 2BX. The nominated Liquidator can be contacted on Tel: 0141 353 3552 or by email: derekj@gcrr.co.uk Peter Waterman, Director 19 February 2018 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Nth Degree Posted March 17, 2018 Share Posted March 17, 2018 Do you know the name of the company ? if not this is just a bit of hearsay. Sadly, if true it's morally wrong but not illegal. I know because I wanted to buy it – being by far the most valuable part of the company – so asked the liquidator (as did at least one other I was led to believe). The freely-available information to do so is in the post above this. The company it transferred into has a very similar name to the originating company. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold TheSignalEngineer Posted March 17, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 17, 2018 Sounds a bit like our local double glazing company, the owner of which had at least two dormant companies with similar names to the operational one. That would go into administration a few days after anything of value had been 'sold' to one others which was then revived. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
vaughan45 Posted March 17, 2018 Share Posted March 17, 2018 (edited) I'm going to watch this develop with keen interest. In light of Arran's post above anybody who is owed money would do well to make their voice heard by objecting to the business being wound up through the correct channels. Think you may be a bit late - the deadline for objections was 1st March 2018, so if it will depend on whether 10% of the creditors (by value of amount owed) objected. If the largest were preferential creditors such as HMRC or banks they probably wouldn't object as they would just attempt to realise what value they could from the situation. There is also the possibility that a director could also be a major creditor. Because the company is a separate entity and the director technically an employee they could be owed fees or monies provided to the company entity as loans etc. Edited March 17, 2018 by vaughan45 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Reid Posted March 17, 2018 Share Posted March 17, 2018 Is it really necessary to dig up this old ground? This isn't fresh news Arran, this was covered over a month ago in this thread and is common knowledge. The correct legal approaches were made by those who may be creditors back then. Does this need to turn into a witch hunt by those who have nothing owing and by others who seem only interested in picking from the corpse. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
arran Posted March 17, 2018 Share Posted March 17, 2018 Is it really necessary to dig up this old ground? This isn't fresh news Arran, this was covered over a month ago in this thread and is common knowledge. The correct legal approaches were made by those who may be creditors back then. Does this need to turn into a witch hunt by those who have nothing owing and by others who seem only interested in picking from the corpse. HI Some seem to have missed it. why did you not remind them ? regards Arran Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Osgood Posted March 17, 2018 Share Posted March 17, 2018 I don't think it is necessary to keep repeating information - if anyone visiting this thread for the first time to look at a new post is interested, then they can start at page 1 and follow the discussion. It would be nice to be able to move some discussions on constructively without the need to constantly re-state positions. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Reid Posted March 17, 2018 Share Posted March 17, 2018 HI Some seem to have missed it. why did you not remind them ? regards Arran Some - like yourself? Don't worry the bandwagon operates a half-hourly service specially for those who seem to have some beef against Pete Waterman. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
meil Posted March 17, 2018 Share Posted March 17, 2018 I suggest you are all getting very confused. Has anyone said that the company cannot pay its debts? Putting a company into voluntary liquidation is no indication that the company cannot meet its obligations - quite the reverse. It is a way to bring the company to an end. Unfortunately you are all confusing this with involuntary liquidation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Osgood Posted March 17, 2018 Share Posted March 17, 2018 I suggest you are all getting very confused. ...... Maybe not all of us 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
vaughan45 Posted March 17, 2018 Share Posted March 17, 2018 (edited) The other information that is not available, is who owns the tooling for the kits? Edited March 17, 2018 by vaughan45 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
meil Posted March 17, 2018 Share Posted March 17, 2018 (edited) Other things happened too before that event. The IP suddenly transferred into a new company and, in fact, the only things that were left were the debts and the old factory plant. The more you look into it the more calculated it appears to be. And how much did the new company pay for the IP? Full market value perhaps? So why is that illegal or immoral? Edited March 17, 2018 by meil Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Nth Degree Posted March 17, 2018 Share Posted March 17, 2018 How do you know this information Meil? Or is this entirely supposition? You can clearly see from my text you quoted I made no reference at all to legality or morality, just that it was a calculated move. My statement is fact. I don't know what yours is. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
arran Posted March 17, 2018 Share Posted March 17, 2018 Some - like yourself? Don't worry the bandwagon operates a half-hourly service specially for those who seem to have some beef against Pete Waterman. Im only posting whats online to those that have not seen it, i dont think theirs a bandwagon against the Man, but you have to accept he has brought some of this comment onto his own head. As for having a Beef, if he does walk away and customers are out of pocket I will ask you to eat your words, I do hope i am wrong but i fear i am correct. The fact the receiver is involved looks to me at least that hes walking away "can you say different" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
84B Oxley Posted March 17, 2018 Share Posted March 17, 2018 A little light relief. If anybody wants a 47 kit there is one on eBay at the moment....a cool £1500! But open to offers.............. https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/JLTRT-BR-Class-47-O-gauge-diesel-loco-kit-New/202258715748?_trkparms=pageci%3Afe6ca934-2a0f-11e8-a64b-74dbd1804f89%7Cparentrq%3A3531d7131620ab1cab7bbedcfffbc2c7%7Ciid%3A1&_trksid=p2481888.c100675.m4236 Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold chris p bacon Posted March 17, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 17, 2018 Im only posting whats online to those that have not seen it, i dont think theirs a bandwagon against the Man, but you have to accept he has brought some of this comment onto his own head. As for having a Beef, if he does walk away and customers are out of pocket I will ask you to eat your words, I do hope i am wrong but i fear i am correct. The fact the receiver is involved looks to me at least that hes walking away "can you say different" That says more to me that the company was unsustainable, instead of walking away maybe he's got to the end of subsidising everyone else's modelling purchases. Just an alternative viewpoint. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim.snowdon Posted March 17, 2018 Share Posted March 17, 2018 That says more to me that the company was unsustainable, instead of walking away maybe he's got to the end of subsidising everyone else's modelling purchases. Just an alternative viewpoint. When the debts exceed the value of the company, it's not a case of PW subsidising his products, but the debtors doing so, and finally deciding that enough is enough. Then, because it is a limited company, PW's liabilities are limited, which means that he is, in effect, walking away. Jim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts