Dispute at Pillings

[Mike Tee]

Sorry to disappoint the Paul haters on here but him and his partner Chris along with Roy spoke very well. I am not worried and that seemed to be the same with the majority of people that I know. Obviously there were people there that had no reason to be there. Also some people that got personal.

I didn't realise it was not an open meeting

[Hey Ho]

Everyone there had a reason to be there, otherwise they wouldn't have been there.

[nicknorman]

Sorry to disappoint the Paul haters on here but him and his partner Chris along with Roy spoke very well. I am not worried and that seemed to be the same with the majority of people that I know.

Not worried because they are going to pay the outstanding debt to CRT?

Not worried because you don't think CRT will go through with cutting off access?

Not worried because you are a permanent marina dweller and don't care if you are cut off?

Not worried because you are in fact PL and have trousered enough cash to keep you going for a long while?

Edited January 24, 2014 by nicknorman

[Alan de Enfield]

Sorry to disappoint the Paul haters on here but him and his partner Chris along with Roy spoke very well. I am not worried and that seemed to be the same with the majority of people that I know. Obviously there were people there that had no reason to be there. Also some people that got personal.

[Paul G2]

Sorry to disappoint the Paul haters on here but him and his partner Chris along with Roy spoke very well. I am not worried and that seemed to be the same with the majority of people that I know. Obviously there were people there that had no reason to be there. Also some people that got personal.

 

Expecting Paul Lillie to pass the taxes he has collected on to the CRT, rather than pocketing them for his own use, is not hating him. It is merely expecting him to be a responsible citizen. Accusing those who expect Mr. Lillie to be responsible as "Paul haters" is nothing more than obfuscation on your part.

[Pillingsmoorer]

It was an open meeting however if I did not moor here what business would it be of mine.

[Gatesofrome]

The meeting was interesting, the company is going to go into voluntary liquidation, Paul said that it will not affect the agreed mooring fees that will not go up. He said it was a simple to start up a new company with in 24 hours and the company with just the same people in charge would take over and have a new agreement with CRT, so the owed money would not have to be paid. I really do not understand how that works...... Any one know?

[Alan de Enfield]

It was an open meeting however if I did not moor here what business would it be of mine.

How about - he has cost me and other licence payers £180,000

[nicknorman]

The meeting was interesting, the company is going to go into voluntary liquidation, Paul said that it will not affect the agreed mooring fees that will not go up. He said it was a simple to start up a new company with in 24 hours and the company with just the same people in charge would take over and have a new agreement with CRT, so the owed money would not have to be paid. I really do not understand how that works...... Any one know?

If you think CRT will swallow that without a fight, you may be a little naive! The catch is in the "and have a new agreement with CRT"

[Paul G2]

The meeting was interesting, the company is going to go into voluntary liquidation, Paul said that it will not affect the agreed mooring fees that will not go up. He said it was a simple to start up a new company with in 24 hours and the company with just the same people in charge would take over and have a new agreement with CRT, so the owed money would not have to be paid. I really do not understand how that works...... Any one know?

 

Search "phoenix" on this thread and you should find good explanations.

[Mike Tee]

The meeting was interesting, the company is going to go into voluntary liquidation, Paul said that it will not affect the agreed mooring fees that will not go up. He said it was a simple to start up a new company with in 24 hours and the company with just the same people in charge would take over and have a new agreement with CRT, so the owed money would not have to be paid. I really do not understand how that works...... Any one know?

Yes its called theft - allegedly

[eightpot]

The meeting was interesting, the company is going to go into voluntary liquidation, Paul said that it will not affect the agreed mooring fees that will not go up. He said it was a simple to start up a new company with in 24 hours and the company with just the same people in charge would take over and have a new agreement with CRT, so the owed money would not have to be paid. I really do not understand how that works...... Any one know?

 

 

Run away. As fast as you can.

 

At least, I would be looking feverishly for a new mooring.

[Ally]

I was there, from a business point of view, as I have direct business involvement at Pillings twice a year, and so we, and our current customers, could be affected by a closure should it happen.

I do not feel it is appropriate for me to deliver any report however, sorry.

It was less than comfortable for many, and I did not feel reassured. That is all I will say however.

I hope the matter is resolved to the best effect for the moorers and leaseholders.

[Ex- Member]

I was always under the impression that voluntary liquidation meant you ceased trading but paid off all your debtors using remaining company assets.

[Alan de Enfield]

The meeting was interesting, the company is going to go into voluntary liquidation, Paul said that it will not affect the agreed mooring fees that will not go up. He said it was a simple to start up a new company with in 24 hours and the company with just the same people in charge would take over and have a new agreement with CRT, so the owed money would not have to be paid. I really do not understand how that works...... Any one know?

It works because it is legal to do it - is it morally correct no !!!

 

I cannot see the new company lasting very long - where will its income come from to pay C&RT the £40,000 per year, and all the other suppliers, rates, wages etc ?

 

The leaseholders have already paid their 25 / 30 years worth of 'income' which has been forfeited to the old company are they going to have to pay again, are the annual moorers who have paid in advance expected to pay again ?

 

Where is the income coming from ?

[Nightwatch]

I hope CRT legal eagles are sharpening their pencils.

 

They can't really allow this to continue, can they?

[Hey Ho]

Paul said that it will not affect the agreed mooring fees that will not go up. He said it was a simple to start up a new company with in 24 hours and the company with just the same people in charge would take over and have a new agreement with CRT, so the owed money would not have to be paid.

 

What a guy...

[nicknorman]

I hope the matter is resolved to the best effect for the moorers and leaseholders.

So do we all, of course, however I just can't see CRT saying "never mind, we'll write off the NAA fees from the old company and start again with a new NAA with a new company operated by the same people". More likely they will refuse an NAA, then there will be a long and acrimonious legal battle meanwhile the marina remains cut off. A better (ie swifter) outcome would be if the marina owners/operators had to sell up.

[Gatesofrome]

Run away. As fast as you can.

At least, I would be looking feverishly for a new mooring.

Mmmmm it is all a but worrying

 

I was always under the impression that voluntary liquidation meant you ceased trading but paid off all your debtors using remaining company assets.

 

That is what I thought it does not seem right

[nicknorman]

I was always under the impression that voluntary liquidation meant you ceased trading but paid off all your debtors using remaining company assets.

Good point. And if they are going to pay, why bother with a new company?

[cloggy]

Im sure someone on here must know, are C&RT obliged to deal with a new company or can they tell them to sod off and cut the connection.

Just curious

[One sheet]

I must take my boat my donkey and my self to the

High hill and go. Bye bye lovely boaters .

[Willber G]

I was always under the impression that voluntary liquidation meant you ceased trading but paid off all your debtors using remaining company assets.

I think earlier in this thread the company assets were cited as being zero.

[Ex- Member]

Good point. And if they are going to pay, why bother with a new company?

 

Maybe they think they can negotiate a reduced payment of debt, possibly half or even less, I don't think they can liquidate until payments to debtors are made or agreed, I could be wrong but I was contemplating bankruptcy a few years ago and that's some of the options I recall.

[Ange]

I was always under the impression that voluntary liquidation meant you ceased trading but paid off all your debtors using remaining company assets.

I was under the impression that the company going into liquidation doesn't have any assets - aren't there three companies involved in the ownership and running of PL?

I think earlier in this thread the company assets were cited as being zero.

Beat me to it