Sentinel Today - Interim board + Deakin e-mail

[VantaaVale]

http://www.thisisstaffordshire.co.uk/S-GAME/story-15029975-detail/story.html

 

One question: As Deakin is pursuing Julicher to gain control of the BSI shares, have Miller and Deakin done the same with their own nil paid shares? That is, sold them to these mystery investors for £1.

[geegee]

Looking at this another way does this mean that Blue Sky can vote at the EGM and if so and given that they are clearly helping the SC will they vote with us?

[tisdeano]

Stan meigh now has a chance to show he can act with honesty and integrity and he is not like some other board members past & present.

[Warren]

Well done the Supporters Club, really stepped up its game since last November. The interim board's appointment is critical to keeping season ticket sales high at the very least.

 

But surely there is a fraud in this article. If a promise to pay for shares has been made which is legally binding and upon which other shareholders have relied that debt to the club exists - full stop. Perry Deakin here is acting against the financial interests of the club in breach of his director's duty under the Companies Act and this may also be an offence under Section 4 of the Fraud Act 2006 - Abuse of Office. He is potentially seeking to write off a legitimate debt by creating a false transfer to another person. That person could buy shares in the club in their own right and independent of any previous purchase and have no personal interest in previous share issues. Therefore Perry Deakin is trying to cause the club, the corporate entity, to lose £150000. Matter for the police?

 

The same thing may well be happening in respect of other shareholdings. A director should withdraw from any business transaction involving the club where there is a conflict of interest under the Companies Act duties. If they don't they are clearly doing wrong. The club is a corporate person and mis-selling its shares for personal gain / avoidance of personal liability is fraud.

[VantaaVale]

I don't think the club would lose £150K, Warren. The new investors must pay that debt. This is what worries me about whether Miller and Deakin have already made this transaction with these investors.

 

If all those transactions happen, the club gets £500K, but all of those shares will be pro-board.

[tisdeano]

Good points Warren

[Warren]

I don't think the club would lose £150K, Warren. The new investors must pay that debt. This is what worries me about whether Miller and Deakin have already made this transaction with these investors.

 

If all those transactions happen, the club gets £500K, but all of those shares will be pro-board.

 

Sorry, you are missing the point. The debt exists and is the property of the corporate person Port Vale. A new investor seeking to buy shares is another independent transaction unrelated to the first. Deakin has no right at all to act against the club's interests by facilitating a sale of unpaid for shares, where a liability exists, and losing the club investment funds in the process. Unless there is something in the paper work that allows this, which might also be acting against the club's interests, this is a serious matter and the police should be asked to investigate.

 

But this has wider implications for all the significant shareholders. They should not be paid off at the club's expense when new investment is brought in. The directors should negotiate a full amount of investment in the club. The sale of shares already owned is for them outside. If there is a conflict interest like that they should withdraw from involvment in negotiating the investment. There is also another responsibility in office here because the board control who can and can't buy shares in the club and have acted against people in the past wishing to invest. So that creates an even higher ethical and legal duty.

[lydiatevaliant]

What will happen if Meigh pulls the plug on sponsoring an interim board member on the day of the EGM?

[Robbie Earle's Perm]

Stan meigh now has a chance to show he can act with honesty and integrity and he is not like some other board members past & present.

 

Don't hold your breath Ant!

[Warren]

I think three pressures may influence Meigh. Firstly he is a supporter and wants to see the club survive. Therefore secondly he will recognise that a collapse in season ticket sales will arise if an interim board is not appointed. Thirdly, any reasonable person would be dismayed by the actions of the present board.

[Jacko51]

What will happen if Meigh pulls the plug on sponsoring an interim board member on the day of the EGM?

 

He will never be able to go to a Vale game in peace again I suspect.

[tisdeano]

Don't hold your breath Ant!

 

I will speak to Stan on Saturday, to be fair he has always been sound with me.......however the baord have destroyed my trust so Im finding it hard not to tar Stan with the same brush.

 

I will tell him this is his chance to go from zero to hero and dont waste this chance

[sandyford_valiant]

What will happen if Meigh pulls the plug on sponsoring an interim board member on the day of the EGM?

 

Then he wo't get out of the Building alive.

[VantaaVale]

Sorry, you are missing the point. The debt exists and is the property of the corporate person Port Vale. A new investor seeking to buy shares is another independent transaction unrelated to the first. Deakin has no right at all to act against the club's interests by facilitating a sale of unpaid for shares, where a liability exists, and losing the club investment funds in the process. Unless there is something in the paper work that allows this, which might also be acting against the club's interests, this is a serious matter and the police should be asked to investigate.

 

I could be misunderstanding this situation. It wouldn't be the first time.

 

However, in Deakin's email he mentions the club solicitors. So I would imagine that he has run the legality of this transaction by them first. If not, he's a complete fool.

 

The way I see this working is:

 

1) Julicher shares are still issued by PVFC but not paid for. A debt of £150K is owed to PVFC.

 

2) Deakin gives Julicher the option to transfer those shares (hopefully legally) to a third party for £1.

 

3) The third party pays £149,999 to PVFC.

 

So the club is not out of pocket, Julicher is absolved of the debt and the shares become pro-board when previously they were most likely anti-board or ghost shares.

 

Does this border on money laundering in a different form (share laundering), if it is illegal?

[Howjy04]

VantaaVale,I think what Warren is saying is that a new investor can buy 150k in shares ( not Hanks) and Vale would still be owed 150k by Hank.Deakin is acting not in the best interests of the club as Vale would be 150k out of pocket the way he is trying to get the shares transferred.That's the way I see it.