Sir Philip Green vs Select committee
Discussion
sidicks said:
A transfer charge is not unusual.
A transfer charge was made. This (£700) was a separate charge which they eventually explained after my 3 previous requests were parried using "markets go up as well as down" as "an unfortunate error because the amount wasn't transferred to your annuity provider (because they didn't request the fund in time) but was put in a holding account which attracted an interest charge". Strange how the fund got to the Annuity provider on the anniversary of my Birthday when the fund matured, but hey it was all sorted out in the end 
Maybe I'm paranoid, but I suspect they are fraudsters.
Fastpedeller said:
One things for sure as regards BHS..... The Accountants will come out smelling of roses! Company does well they get their hefty fee - Company folds they get their hefty fees for doing the winding up.
That is their job.Although it is usually different ones who do the annual audit vs. those who do the administration.
Would you rather companies didn't have independent auditors?
walm said:
Fastpedeller said:
One things for sure as regards BHS..... The Accountants will come out smelling of roses! Company does well they get their hefty fee - Company folds they get their hefty fees for doing the winding up.
That is their job.Although it is usually different ones who do the annual audit vs. those who do the administration.
Would you rather companies didn't have independent auditors?
audidoody said:
Anyone got any theory as to why Goldman Squid vouched for the useless ex-bankrupt racing driver.
You could check here...https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Old_Millfiel...
But it's probably just another case of bulls
t talks and money walks. Him and his friend Green and Paul Sutton are effectively nothing more than modern day dandy highwaymen.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Alexander_Sutto...
audidoody said:
Anyone got any theory as to why Goldman Squid vouched for the useless ex-bankrupt racing driver.
I though GS warned him?"Anthony Gutman, who, says the BBC, confirmed the bank was not paid to provide advice as the deal was too small, although he did inform Arcadia of Chappell's "history of bankruptcy and lack of retail experience"."
Green himself suggested that is was Olswang and Grant Thornton who did the vouching.
Which is obviously ridiculous.
And he nicely contradicted himself at the same time:
"Green told the committee: 'I took personally comfort from Grant Thornton and Olswang for representing this guy, as being reputable for being well-regarded firms.'
Green added that he took a 'great deal of comfort' that Olswang and Grant Thornton were representing Chappell, even though he suspected 'they didn't know the guy from a hole in the wall' before the deal began."
walm said:
That's not quite what happened, though I can see how it does look like that from a distance.
He took the dividends when the pension fund was in SURPLUS.
(That's my reading of the annual reports of the companies in question.)
Not so sure about that as I think he continued to take dividends even after the pension fund had moved into deficit. I don't think that's illegal per se but dividends are a discretionary appropriation and therefore to be paying them when you know you've got a company pension scheme moving further and further into deficit is arguably not good stewardship. Of course it could be argued that a company's run for the benefit of its shareholders and not its employees but Green was keen to stress yesterday how much he valued his staff; however, actions speak louder than words and it looks to me like his primary interest was swelling the already substantial family coffers still further.He took the dividends when the pension fund was in SURPLUS.
(That's my reading of the annual reports of the companies in question.)
walm said:
IMHO what is more interesting is that:
1. SPG capped the pension contributions to £10m. These are payments to help reduce the deficit. That's very dodgy.
2. He appears to have done everything in his power to hide the scale of the pension hole from the aforementioned clueless ring piece (CRP). e.g. not letting CRP speak to the regulator, avoiding the subject, preventing due diligence etc...
3. Everything points to him NEEDING a CRP for anyone with half a brain would have noticed the ridiculous hospital pass they were getting and run a mile. Hence no deal with the lovely Mr Ashley (Mike not Laura). He would have seen the problems a mile off. Again, that's abhorrent behaviour and most likely illegal.
He once said, “If I give you my plane...and you tell me you’re a great driver and you crash it into the first mountain, is that my fault?”
Well, yes it is if you forgot to mention that the plane has no fuel and is missing a wing.
Agreed! 1. SPG capped the pension contributions to £10m. These are payments to help reduce the deficit. That's very dodgy.
2. He appears to have done everything in his power to hide the scale of the pension hole from the aforementioned clueless ring piece (CRP). e.g. not letting CRP speak to the regulator, avoiding the subject, preventing due diligence etc...
3. Everything points to him NEEDING a CRP for anyone with half a brain would have noticed the ridiculous hospital pass they were getting and run a mile. Hence no deal with the lovely Mr Ashley (Mike not Laura). He would have seen the problems a mile off. Again, that's abhorrent behaviour and most likely illegal.
He once said, “If I give you my plane...and you tell me you’re a great driver and you crash it into the first mountain, is that my fault?”
Well, yes it is if you forgot to mention that the plane has no fuel and is missing a wing.
walm said:
And he nicely contradicted himself at the same time:
"Green told the committee: 'I took personally comfort from Grant Thornton and Olswang for representing this guy, as being reputable for being well-regarded firms.'
Green added that he took a 'great deal of comfort' that Olswang and Grant Thornton were representing Chappell, even though he suspected 'they didn't know the guy from a hole in the wall' before the deal began."
Is this inconsistent?"Green told the committee: 'I took personally comfort from Grant Thornton and Olswang for representing this guy, as being reputable for being well-regarded firms.'
Green added that he took a 'great deal of comfort' that Olswang and Grant Thornton were representing Chappell, even though he suspected 'they didn't know the guy from a hole in the wall' before the deal began."
It's not unreasonable that they may not have known him before the deal began but, once appointed to help him with the deal, they would have been expected to undertake appropriate due diligence and that was what Green was relying on?
FredClogs said:
Unforeseen market movements my arse... I can't just not pay my mortgage this month and say to the building society, sorry peeps, unforeseen markets movements, you understand, I know I've sold the kitchen, carpets and fittings and half the structural components, pocketed the money in my wifes name in a swiss bank and damaged the rest rendering the house unsaleable but - you know, unforeseen market movements.
If you make a commitment to people you stick to it, it's called being a man, and not a oily fking slug.
Take his money and string him up.
FredClogs - you're not getting it mate.If you make a commitment to people you stick to it, it's called being a man, and not a oily f
king slug.Take his money and string him up.
I'm not saying he's a good guy. Anything but.
BUT, is IS true that the market movements can DECIMATE the value of a pension fund. He could have been doing everything right, putting tens of millions of pounds into the scheme and there may STILL have been a shortfall.
sidicks said:
Is this inconsistent?
It's not unreasonable that they may not have known him before the deal began but, once appointed to help him with the deal, they would have been expected to undertake appropriate due diligence and that was what Green was relying on?
I know what you mean.It's not unreasonable that they may not have known him before the deal began but, once appointed to help him with the deal, they would have been expected to undertake appropriate due diligence and that was what Green was relying on?
But it's more that these are guns for hire (i.e. anyone can pay them for representation) and that they have no reputation on the line other than to do the job they are paid for which is legal and accounting, not buyer due diligence - that's Goldman's job.
So to say they lent him credibility is just BS.
I mean, Green didn't even google the guy FFS.
Although it is harder to do that if you're still using a Nokia 3210.
walm said:
I though GS warned him?
"Anthony Gutman, who, says the BBC, confirmed the bank was not paid to provide advice as the deal was too small, although he did inform Arcadia of Chappell's "history of bankruptcy and lack of retail experience"."
He told the Select Committee he wouldn't have touched Chappell without the Goldmans' OK"Anthony Gutman, who, says the BBC, confirmed the bank was not paid to provide advice as the deal was too small, although he did inform Arcadia of Chappell's "history of bankruptcy and lack of retail experience"."
audidoody said:
walm said:
I though GS warned him?
"Anthony Gutman, who, says the BBC, confirmed the bank was not paid to provide advice as the deal was too small, although he did inform Arcadia of Chappell's "history of bankruptcy and lack of retail experience"."
He told the Select Committee he wouldn't have touched Chappell without the Goldmans' OK"Anthony Gutman, who, says the BBC, confirmed the bank was not paid to provide advice as the deal was too small, although he did inform Arcadia of Chappell's "history of bankruptcy and lack of retail experience"."
It's a tough one... do we believe the GS guy or Green - I am not sure they can both be right!!
The report says that Philip Green is "The unacceptable face of capitalism" and I'd agree. He and his family have ripped the guts out of their businesses for their own personal enrichment leaving the employees without a pension and/or without a job.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36879241
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36879241
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff