Pillings Lock Marina

[MtB]

More or less but I was expecting the new phoenix to arise before the date for the next payment as I can't see CRT accepting no payment in advance having been diddled once and insisting on payment in advance.

 

 

Now I see where we differ. I simply cannot see CRT chaining off access to the marina on the morning after the NAA payment fails. Can you?

 

Last time around they will gave chance after chance and then some before taking effective action. They faffed around in the courts for four years then allowed PL to go bust and avoid payment completely before they set a date to block off access. Then the old new company was formed and a new NAA agreed and paid with hours to spare before the deadline.

 

This time I grant you they will be quicker, but I still expect they will give about two years of chances before playing hardball. All the time PL will be pocketing the NAA from the boaters and will be terribly tempted to go bust again rather than hand it all over to CRT. After all it worked last time, and CRT seem to have all the commercial nouse of any other quango.

 

I hope I'm wrong.

[Jerra]

 

 

Now I see where we differ. I simply cannot see CRT chaining off access to the marina on the morning after the NAA payment fails. Can you?

 

Last time around they will gave chance after chance and then some before taking effective action. They faffed around in the courts for four years then allowed PL to go bust and avoid payment completely before they set a date to block off access. Then the old new company was formed and a new NAA agreed and paid with hours to spare before the deadline.

 

This time I grant you they will be quicker, but I still expect they will give about two years of chances before playing hardball. All the time PL will be pocketing the NAA from the boaters and will be terribly tempted to go bust again rather than hand it all over to CRT. After all it worked last time, and CRT seem to have all the commercial nouse of any other quango.

 

I hope I'm wrong.

You are suggesting they don't learn by experience! I am not suggesting they will block the entrance on the first day but I would expect weeks rather than months. I don't think the CEO is quite that daft (to allow years) particularly as they hare hardening their attitude to CCing that doesn't fit their criteria. They won't want/can't afford to be seen as soft on some things.

 

Just my opinion which I know m,any won't agree with and I may be proved wrong.

[b0atman]

bankrupt and liquidation I believe are different ways of avoiding your debts am I right ?

[MtB]

bankrupt and liquidation I believe are different ways of avoiding your debts am I right ?

`

Bankruptcy is personal. Liquidation is an obsolete term (replaced - loosely - by 'administration') for ltd companies.

 

 

MtB

[Peter X]

Having read and taken part in last year's epic topic on Pillings Lock, I feel MtB is perhaps too pessimistic about what CRT would do if Paul Lillie were to fail to cough up the NAA money when due. That would indeed be early April if the deadline is a year from the last deal.

 

As Jerra says, CRT might have learned a lesson from last time around, and Richard Parry may be the crucial factor. It's worth remembering that the great bulk of the delay by BW/CRT in going after the debt didn't happen on his watch. Richard Parry took over CRT in summer 2013: https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/news-and-views/news/new-chief-executive-appointed

and about 6 months later Quorn Marina Holdings Ltd, the company which on paper owed the debt, was put into administration. By the usual (poor, I agree with MtB on that) standards of large quangos I'd call that speedy action.

 

Does anyone know whether the administrator has filed his report on the demise of QMH with the DTI yet, as sooner or later he must? In the original topic I argued that the proper remedy provided by the law is that the minister (Vince Cable), if he then feels that there is sufficient evidence of trading while insolvent, and I think there would be, can have the DTI prosecute Paul Lillie, who may expect to be barred from being a company director and possibly even made personally liable for part of the debt. If I were Richard Parry I would be looking to promote this idea in Whitehall.

 

Correction: I've checked back and the company which went into administration was Quorn Marina Properties Ltd,

often abbreviated to QMP. QMH is the parent holding company.

Edited February 14, 2015 by Peter X

[Willber G]

In the original topic I argued that the proper remedy provided by the law is that the minister (Vince Cable), if he then feels that there is sufficient evidence of trading while insolvent, and I think there would be, can have the DTI prosecute Paul Lillie, who may expect to be barred from being a company director and possibly even made personally liable for part of the debt. If I were Richard Parry I would be looking to promote this idea in Whitehall.

Maybe that's something CRT's Political Officer is working on.

[cuthound]

`

Bankruptcy is personal. Liquidation is an obsolete term (replaced - loosely - by 'administration') for ltd companies.

 

 

MtB

When a company is "in administration" a firm of administrators take charge of the running of it.

 

Their aim is to find a buyer and sell it as a going concern.

 

If that is not possible the "liquidate" the assets - sell them off to pay the company's debts. There is a pecking order of debtors, with HMRC at the top, and having sold off anything of value, they distribute the liquidated assets proportionally, for example you may get 25p for every £1 you are owed.

[cotswoldsman]

When a company is "in administration" a firm of administrators take charge of the running of it.

 

Their aim is to find a buyer and sell it as a going concern.

 

If that is not possible the "liquidate" the assets - sell them off to pay the company's debts. There is a pecking order of debtors, with HMRC at the top, and having sold off anything of value, they distribute the liquidated assets proportionally, for example you may get 25p for every £1 you are owed.

HMRC come after assets secured against debt (from memory)

[Peter X]

When a company is "in administration" a firm of administrators take charge of the running of it.

 

Their aim is to find a buyer and sell it as a going concern.

 

If that is not possible the "liquidate" the assets - sell them off to pay the company's debts. There is a pecking order of debtors, with HMRC at the top, and having sold off anything of value, they distribute the liquidated assets proportionally, for example you may get 25p for every £1 you are owed.

 

As Cotswoldsman said, debts secured against assets take priority over other debts.

HMRC used to take priority over other unsecured creditors, but that is no longer the case; the law was changed a few years ago.

 

In the case of QMP it's all academic because Paul Lillie, or in reality Mr Steadman whose shareholding controls the parent holding company QMH, ensured that QMP had no saleable assets and lots of debt. In the course of last year's topic it was established that they'd set up the companies so that QMP owed the NAA fees to CRT, and also owed a big debt to Pillings Lock Marina Ltd, the company actually operating the marina. The justification they used for the latter debt is unknown, but I speculated that PLM was supposed to owe QMP the cost of building the marina.

 

The company structure was summarised here:

http://www.canalworld.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=63317&p=1217863

and to avoid confusion I've put a correction at the foot of my previous post where I had used the wrong company name.

[simon&jan]

 

Which isn't what I said.

The person I replied to seemed to imply that the entrance was blocked and a crane was needed to get a boat out.

That is not the case because a NEW company paid the required charge in advance.

Sorry i didnt realise a 'new company' had taken over and i didnt imply the entrance was blocked,it was a question without a question mark!! I shall go and add one now !!

[cuthound]

As Cotswoldsman said, debts secured against assets take priority over other debts.

HMRC used to take priority over other unsecured creditors, but that is no longer the case; the law was changed a few years ago.

 

In the case of QMP it's all academic because Paul Lillie, or in reality Mr Steadman whose shareholding controls the parent holding company QMH, ensured that QMP had no saleable assets and lots of debt. In the course of last year's topic it was established that they'd set up the companies so that QMP owed the NAA fees to CRT, and also owed a big debt to Pillings Lock Marina Ltd, the company actually operating the marina. The justification they used for the latter debt is unknown, but I speculated that PLM was supposed to owe QMP the cost of building the marina.

 

The company structure was summarised here:

http://www.canalworld.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=63317&p=1217863

and to avoid confusion I've put a correction at the foot of my previous post where I had used the wrong company name.

That'll teach me to rely on memory!

 

Thanks for the corrections Cotswoldsman and Peter X

[Mike Todd]

 

In theory this is right but in practice, it doesn't happen. Certainly didn't happen withe the last liquidation of PL. This is because there is no-one willing to foot the bill for the forensic accountants to do their stuff.

 

MtB

I don't recall there being an accusation that there were doubtful transactions after it became that one company in the complex network associated with PL was insolvenmt, or even just before.

 

Lots of other things were alleged!

 

 

Now I see where we differ. I simply cannot see CRT chaining off access to the marina on the morning after the NAA payment fails. Can you?

 

Last time around they will gave chance after chance and then some before taking effective action. They faffed around in the courts for four years then allowed PL to go bust and avoid payment completely before they set a date to block off access. Then the old new company was formed and a new NAA agreed and paid with hours to spare before the deadline.

 

This time I grant you they will be quicker, but I still expect they will give about two years of chances before playing hardball. All the time PL will be pocketing the NAA from the boaters and will be terribly tempted to go bust again rather than hand it all over to CRT. After all it worked last time, and CRT seem to have all the commercial nouse of any other quango.

 

I hope I'm wrong.

Precipitous action would prejudice CRT's case and could even play into PL's hands if they then challenge the action in court. I'd be surprised if CRT are not keeping a close eye on the situation - maybe even ensuring that the relevant rquipment just happens to be 'in the area' at the appropriate moment!

[furnessvale]

When a company is "in administration" a firm of administrators take charge of the running of it.

 

Their aim is to find a buyer and sell it as a going concern.

 

If that is not possible the "liquidate" the assets - sell them off to pay the company's debts. There is a pecking order of debtors, with HMRC at the top, and having sold off anything of value, they distribute the liquidated assets proportionally, for example you may get 25p for every £1 you are owed.

Except in the case of Association Football Clubs, so I understand.

 

For some unfathomable reason, football debts trump everyone else, so the £50 million someone owns for a golden balls boots player gets paid before the taxman, thus I end up paying more tax myself. Oh how I love hate football.

 

George ex nb Alton retired

Precipitous action would prejudice CRT's case and could even play into PL's hands if they then challenge the action in court. I'd be surprised if CRT are not keeping a close eye on the situation - maybe even ensuring that the relevant rquipment just happens to be 'in the area' at the appropriate moment!

I would expect nothing less than a piling rig arriving opposite the marina entrance the day before money is due, just to encourage les autres.

 

George ex nb Alton retired

[steven wilkinson]

I would expect nothing less than a piling rig arriving opposite the marina entrance the day before money is due, just to encourage les autres.

 

George ex nb Alton retired

 

Now that would get my vote too!

[Phantasm]

There seems to be a stirring of rumours .....anyone heard anything?

post removed

Edited February 15, 2015 by Phantasm

[MHS]

Just picked up February's Tlllergraph.

 

Pillings offering "Try 12 months with us for just £1299.00"

 

Is the use of the word "Try" living in hope.

 

As my dad always said "if it looks to good to be true"

[MtB]

Sounds like quite a good deal if you want to bridge hop in Hackney, legitimately. (for now!)

 

 

MtB

 

 

 

.

Edited February 15, 2015 by Mike the Boilerman

[Sabcat]

Sounds like quite a good deal if you want to bridge hop in Hackney, legitimately. (for now!)

 

 

MtB

 

 

 

.

 

If the entrance to Pillings gets blocked I don't think the mooring would count as a "available"

[MtB]

Yeah but that won't happen for a couple of years...

[Ally]

Just picked up February's Tlllergraph.

Pillings offering "Try 12 months with us for just £1299.00"

Is the use of the word "Try" living in hope.

As my dad always said "if it looks to good to be true"

I know previously when such rates have been offered by them, it's caused some disgruntled murmers from their longer term customers who pay twice that in many cases. Though I imagine that rate will be for a 45 ft boat, or similar, and non residential?

[MHS]

I know previously when such rates have been offered by them, it's caused some disgruntled murmers from their longer term customers who pay twice that in many cases. Though I imagine that rate will be for a 45 ft boat, or similar, and non residential?

It's for up to 60'. *

 

* Terms and conditions apply.

[Dangerous Dave]

It's for up to 60'. *

 

* Terms and conditions apply

 

.

 

As in another scam....

 

In the instance of rumours ..Paul Lillie has a habit of starting such things from his back office .

 

I take it no one has seen the email he has sent to all his moorers..Absolute laughable how such a person can carry on telling fibbies.

Apparently no one should take notice what is said on line and he will not indulge in any forums as such people are so abusive.

PLM has such a good relationship with C&RT now and is even arranging volunteers to support C&RT work parties..

 

Must be part of ....Well no more information as i'm sure any rumours coming /going around are sourced from PL.

 

Anyone with any sense can see he is a desperate person now letting moorings at £1299 ..Wow such an achievement selling six berthings at that price..All leads to a stop gap to pay a sum of money to C&RT.

 

How anyone would want to pay money to him after all the hype around astounds me!

Indeed existing moorers must be so lumbered to have to stay there.

Definite need for a number of small marinas in the area or at least alternative moorings to rid the canal world of him for good

Edited February 16, 2015 by Dangerous Dave