Dispute at Pillings

[dor]

I think people should put aside the father/son point and just think of it as two people going in to business together. It often happens - the older and wiser partner puts in most of the investment then the younger partner thinks he knows better and screws it all up. Really the father - son relationship is irrelevant.

 

Another point some people seem to be missing is that PL claimed he couldn't afford the NAA payments because he didn't get the 100% occupancy that BW promised him. There is no way that BW would have said that, and no business of this type should work on anything over 70% occupancy, whether it is boats, caravans, hotel rooms or letting flats. I understand that this marina did have at least 70% occupancy by the time it had to pay the full NAA fee, or if not it got close. The marina should have easily managed to pay the NAA if it was being run properly and not having large sums of money being syphoned off. Especially as they took in a substantial amount of money up front for the leased car park spaces. There are plenty of marinas round my way that opened at a similar time and they all managed fine.

[Phantasm]

 

Unless, of course, the company was buying its own shares which seems, not to put too fine a point on it, highly improbable. Furthermore, when setting up a company it is not unusual to price the shares at, say £1, and to then distribute these amongst the investors. The nominal value of those shares does not, of course, reflect the amount of the investments each of the participants contribute to the set-up.

 

What has been claimed here by "csh" is that JohnLillie's investment was around £350,000 and that by withdrawing this sum from the QMP coffers in order to "pay him off" the company was left unable to meet its obligations. JohnLillie has posted a rebuttal that this sum came from QMP and claims that, to the contrary, the repayment was made by Mrs Steadman. Of these competing claims both may be untrue and one most certainly is. Certainly, it is somewhat difficult to see just how QMP would have been in possession of the £350,000 in question unless some third party had provided the cash.

Question: if QMP paid £350k to John Lillie would it not be listed in the accounts

[Alan de Enfield]

I believe it was stated earlier in thr thread (I think by John Lillie) that the 'long lease' receipts were actually used to fund the construction of the building.

 

It would appear that the business was either under capitalised, or the income used 'unwisely' to fund major projects before paying its debts and keeping some reserves.

[johnlillie]

thankyou for pointing that out Phantasm, perhaps CSH or PL could produce account details showing where they say the cash came from?I know for a fact, that at the time, (june2009) PLM had an overdraft of approx. £50k, (near its limit with NatWest) and as you say, nothing is shown in QMP accounts, so what now, CSH/PL?

I believe it was stated earlier in thr thread (I think by John Lillie) that the 'long lease' receipts were actually used to fund the construction of the building.

It would appear that the business was either under capitalised, or the income used 'unwisely' to fund major projects before paying its debts and keeping some reserves.

by the time most of the building/development work was completed in mid 2008, we were on a fairly even keel, according to what I was lead to believe anyway, so most of the funding had been met by initial input from shareholders and lease money.

[Phantasm]

thankyou for pointing that out Phantasm, perhaps CSH or PL could produce account details showing where they say the cash came from?I know for a fact, that at the time, (june2009) PLM had an overdraft of approx. £50k, (near its limit with NatWest) and as you say, nothing is shown in QMP accounts, so what now, CSH/PL?

by the time most of the building/development work was completed in mid 2008, we were on a fairly even keel, according to what I was lead to believe anyway, so most of the funding had been met by initial input from shareholders and lease money.

I've done a quick check at Companies House on documents filed and returned accounts only go up to June 2008, after that it is all small company exemptions. So unless the shareholders/members ask for an audit nothing will be filed.

[Swallowman]

 

Another point some people seem to be missing is that PL claimed he couldn't afford the NAA payments because he didn't get the 100% occupancy that BW promised him. There is no way that BW would have said that, and no business of this type should work on anything over 70% occupancy, whether it is boats, caravans, hotel rooms or letting flats. I understand that this marina did have at least 70% occupancy by the time it had to pay the full NAA fee, or if not it got close. The marina should have easily managed to pay the NAA if it was being run properly . Especially as they took in a substantial amount of money up front for the leased car park spaces. There are plenty of marinas round my way that opened at a similar time and they all managed fine.

 

Not to mention the money they took up front from moorers to pay the NAA fees!

Edited February 28, 2014 by Grace & Favour
a sentence shortened

[MtB]

 

Not to mention the money they took up front from moorers to pay the NAA fees!

 

 

I think had the NAA not existed, the business would still have disintegrated in a whirlwind of debt, half-truths and recriminations. The creditor(s) forcing it would just have been different.

 

MtB

Edited February 28, 2014 by Mike the Boilerman

[Ssscrudddy]

how is discussing residential moorings helping the marina. Or the moorers even??

Well I was at ABNB yesterday at Crick, & the advert for a long term lease (as already discussed earlier in this thread) was still on the wall.

Assuming CRT do block the marina as it appears their last statement on the matter says that is what they will be doing, then it would really suck for a new customer to buy this lease & then have no access to the canal.

 

ABNB were aware of this thread & the situation being discussed when I pointed it out to them yesterday.

[Ssscrudddy]

 

Make sure she does her exercises and the 'slack' should tighten up nicely.

 

Or, 15 years down the road, trade her in for a younger model!

[pillingslock]

 

 

I think had the NAA not existed, the business would still have disintegrated in a whirlwind of debt, half-truths and recriminations. The creditor(s) forcing it would just have been different.

 

MtB

It's a good job that what you "think" and what is actually happening are two very different things Mike.

If this is your understanding of how business works (and how to make a good impression with people on the waterways) I'd hate to have you try and fix one of our boilers! :-)

[mayalld]

It's a good job that what you "think" and what is actually happening are two very different things Mike.

If this is your understanding of how business works (and how to make a good impression with people on the waterways) I'd hate to have you try and fix one of our boilers! :-)

 

Business works by having a sound business plan that isn't predicated upon absolute optimum conditions to work.

 

And frankly, I really can't believe that you are in a position to deliver any homilies on "how to make a good impression with people on the waterways"

[Alan de Enfield]

.....by the time most of the building/development work was completed in mid 2008, we were on a fairly even keel, according to what I was lead to believe anyway, so most of the funding had been met by initial input from shareholders and lease money......

Thanks for confirming what the lease money was used for - I thought I had read it somewhere.

[Dangerous Dave]

 

Quite so His Facebook rant seemed quite the most accomplished act of character assassination of oneself imaginable.

 

 

Then he has the nerve to complain to the Police when one of his victims fight back with supplying this thread with facts and the truth!!

 

Paul Lillie will always be what Paul Lillie is so lets all just stop feeding his sadistic ego trait.

 

If he was a person of honesty and integrity then he would be working to sell the PLM site with or without the blessing of the Steadmans and rein bursing customers their money including compensation for all the nuisance he alone has caused..

The Marina as witnessed by previous customers on her would thrive without him.

 

I say alone because i have it in writing from him, " I am responsible for the running of all three companies" the Steadmans will not take part in the running of PLM or its parent companies..You wouldnt contact the chairman of M&S over an issue would you so the buck stops with me!

 

Instead he even publishes a letter to berth holders slamming the C&RT to which they are hacked off with and to my interpretation are now on a mission to see him PTS!

[csh]

Here we go again, the biased diatribe from the evicted moorers. The lovely community at PLM does not lament the loss of Robin (Dangerous Dave), David (Shyster_basher) or Phantasm (I forget his name). PLM were so keen to expel them from the community that they paid them back what remained of their leases. Good luck to wherever they now reside. They can continue to spread their own particular brand of vitriol there. The 250+ moorers that remain are not joining in with this muck slinging as they are busy enjoying their boating experience. It is the small embittered minority that shout the loudest. People with nothing to complain about do just that. 1% of unhappy customers - this gives the situation some perspective.

[Ray T]

Here we go again, the biased diatribe from the evicted moorers. The lovely community at PLM does not lament the loss of Robin (Dangerous Dave), David (Shyster_basher) or Phantasm (I forget his name). PLM were so keen to expel them from the community that they paid them back what remained of their leases. Good luck to wherever they now reside. They can continue to spread their own particular brand of vitriol there. The 250+ moorers that remain are not joining in with this muck slinging as they are busy enjoying their boating experience. It is the small embittered minority that shout the loudest. People with nothing to complain about do just that. 1% of unhappy customers - this gives the situation some perspective.

 

Sorry, IMHO, smoke and mirrors to avoid the real issue.

[haggis]

I wonder if the boaters will still enjoy their boating when they are boating round a lake?

 

haggis

[Dangerous Dave]

Here we go again, the biased diatribe from the evicted moorers. The lovely community at PLM does not lament the loss of Robin (Dangerous Dave), David (Shyster_basher) or Phantasm (I forget his name). PLM were so keen to expel them from the community that they paid them back what remained of their leases. Good luck to wherever they now reside. They can continue to spread their own particular brand of vitriol there. The 250+ moorers that remain are not joining in with this muck slinging as they are busy enjoying their boating experience. It is the small embittered minority that shout the loudest. People with nothing to complain about do just that. 1% of unhappy customers - this gives the situation some perspective.

 

 

Again you are misleading ..We were not "evicted" but left after an agreement of surrendering our leases.

 

Yes ..PLM is a lovely community but the person managing it is as what 99% of posters on here have come to the conclusion of!

 

Is there really 250 moorers there..Goodness that £1299 special offer really worked well for PLM then. Although i bet they regret it now

 

I wonder how many of that 250 population are two faced then ,because whilst i was there no one had anything good to say about you other half.

 

I can confirm that i /we are having a quality life away from the likes of misleading management

Edited February 28, 2014 by Dangerous Dave

[csh]

The issue is the NAA and this is being discussed with CaRT.

The welfare of the berth holders and their freedom to access the network is paramount.

 

Everything else is personal nonsense not relevant to the thread.

 

When there any new developments, these will be conveyed. For now, there is nothing new to report in this circular argument.

 

Regards,

Chris

[Ronniesonic]

It's a good job that what you "think" and what is actually happening are two very different things Mike.

If this is your understanding of how business works (and how to make a good impression with people on the waterways) I'd hate to have you try and fix one of our boilers! :-)

 

If this was not such a serious issue I would laugh out loud at this reply to MTB. 'Making a good impression' You cannot make this stuff up! Pot & kettle etc.

 

Those who own / have been running PL should hang their heads in shame & I sincerely hope they get what they deserve.

Pay the debt for starters & stop bleeting about overheads that were there from the outset.

 

Your screwing with peoples lives through pure greed & this in my eyes is truly despicable.

 

And C&RT, who we know read this thread with interest, block the place as planned in April & grow a pair sharpish!

[Nightwatch]

Here we go again, the biased diatribe from the evicted moorers. The lovely community at PLM does not lament the loss of Robin (Dangerous Dave), David (Shyster_basher) or Phantasm (I forget his name). PLM were so keen to expel them from the community that they paid them back what remained of their leases. Good luck to wherever they now reside. They can continue to spread their own particular brand of vitriol there. The 250+ moorers that remain are not joining in with this muck slinging as they are busy enjoying their boating experience. It is the small embittered minority that shout the loudest. People with nothing to complain about do just that. 1% of unhappy customers - this gives the situation some perspective.

I was really hoping that you and Paul would come to the forum and act like the majority of us and talk this through as adults with the objective of ascertaining truthfully what the situation is.

 

Maybe, just maybe the remaining moorers at Pillings Lock don't want to upset the apple cart and see their investment and their boating dreams destroyed by being expelled from their mooring. It may be also they are happy with what is being said and alleged by a number of knowledgable people as to what has happened to their contribution to the NAA. To indicate that the business couldn't afford to pay BW/C&RT is nonsense as the money seems to have been paid to the business by the moorers.

 

How sad a situation this is.

[SoosieQ]

Again you are misleading ..We were not "evicted" but left after an agreement of surrendering our leases.

 

Yes ..PLM is a lovely community but the person managing it is as what 99% of posters on here have come to the conclusion of!

 

Is there really 250 moorers there..Goodness that £1299 special offer really worked well for PLM then

If theres 250+moorers,why is there a problem paying the bills? Thats surely almost full?

[gaggle]

 

Sorry, IMHO, smoke and mirrors to avoid the real issue.

 

 

 

Then he has the nerve to complain to the Police when one of his victims fight back with supplying this thread with facts and the truth!!

 

Paul Lillie will always be what Paul Lillie is so lets all just stop feeding his sadistic ego trait.

 

If he was a person of honesty and integrity then he would be working to sell the PLM site with or without the blessing of the Steadmans and rein bursing customers their money including compensation for all the nuisance he alone has caused..

The Marina as witnessed by previous customers on her would thrive without him.

 

I say alone because i have it in writing from him, " I am responsible for the running of all three companies" the Steadmans will not take part in the running of PLM or its parent companies..You wouldnt contact the chairman of M&S over an issue would you so the buck stops with me!

 

Instead he even publishes a letter to berth holders slamming the C&RT to which they are hacked off with and to my interpretation are now on a mission to see him PTS!

 

Here we go again, the biased diatribe from the evicted moorers. The lovely community at PLM does not lament the loss of Robin (Dangerous Dave), David (Shyster_basher) or Phantasm (I forget his name). PLM were so keen to expel them from the community that they paid them back what remained of their leases. Good luck to wherever they now reside. They can continue to spread their own particular brand of vitriol there. The 250+ moorers that remain are not joining in with this muck slinging as they are busy enjoying their boating experience. It is the small embittered minority that shout the loudest. People with nothing to complain about do just that. 1% of unhappy customers - this gives the situation some perspective.

 

Who is it out of all the marina owners shouting the loudest about paying whats owed , the small embittered minority , you and your mate ?

Edited February 28, 2014 by gaggle

[Ronniesonic]

The issue is the NAA and this is being discussed with CaRT.

The welfare of the berth holders and their freedom to access the network is paramount.

 

Everything else is personal nonsense not relevant to the thread.

 

When there any new developments, these will be conveyed. For now, there is nothing new to report in this circular argument.

 

Regards,

Chris

Codswallop. Try this as a novel plan; Pay off the known 'fixed' overhead debt Chris & friends.

[Drop_Shunt]

Hi csh,

 

It sounds like you have the relevant facts and figures to hand, so, to save me doing the legwork, over what time period were the agreed NAA payments made in full please ? I believe that the requirement to make payment in full was phased in over a number of years from the opening of the marina, and I don't have the information to hand to do the maths myself, so it would be very interesting to see when the dispute first arose - I had until your post been under the impression that the agreed payments had never been made !

Drop_Shunt, I'll look into that and send you the information.

 

Thank you very much csh, I look forward to receiving the information detailed above.

[dor]

If theres 250+moorers,why is there a problem paying the bills? Thats surely almost full?

exactly!

 

I know a bit about the finances surrounding running a marina, and if he really has 250 paying berth holders then there really shouldn't be a problem. Unless of course you are grossly incompetent and / or syphoning off a load of money.