JD Classics, what have they been up to?
Discussion
Oh I agree entirely regarding Charme’s TS advisors. But again, we’re not talking about cheque kiting, we’re talking about entirely fictitious sales for more than half of the top 50 trades in a low volume business. On the list of things I would want to check (as either an auditor or buy side DD) this would be high up the list.
DonkeyApple said:
The VC that bought in should have been carrying out its own regular, in depth checks also.
Ultimately fraud happens and good fraudsters, who are quite often accountants by training, know how to cook books so that third parties won't see anything during normal procedures. The law suit will settle whether Hood was really good at what he was doing or whether the market professionals were really bad.
I guess they eventually did exactly that (although PE not VC)Ultimately fraud happens and good fraudsters, who are quite often accountants by training, know how to cook books so that third parties won't see anything during normal procedures. The law suit will settle whether Hood was really good at what he was doing or whether the market professionals were really bad.
Burwood said:
CharlesdeGaulle said:
I'm not great with figures, am easily confused and don't much enjoy detail. I'm beginning to realise that I've missed my vocation as an auditor with this crowd.
I was one. It’s easy Doofus said:
Burwood said:
CharlesdeGaulle said:
I'm not great with figures, am easily confused and don't much enjoy detail. I'm beginning to realise that I've missed my vocation as an auditor with this crowd.
I was one. It’s easy Burwood said:
Doofus said:
Burwood said:
CharlesdeGaulle said:
I'm not great with figures, am easily confused and don't much enjoy detail. I'm beginning to realise that I've missed my vocation as an auditor with this crowd.
I was one. It’s easy I may or may not have been part of the problem.
BobToc said:
Willhire89 said:
If there was a carousel of money which circled around repeatedly and that matched the purchase/sales then what else could PwC do?
Clearly if there was a sale for £1M and no £1M ever appeared through any of the JDCL accounts then that is basic stuff but if the fraud was sophisticated enough to match payments then it gets very hard to spot compounded if (as with Tuke) the deals were often multi car involving swaps and trades
It is hard to catch, but if an auditor can’t be expected to pickup that 29 of the 50 most profitable sales never happened (not exaggerated, not mis-stated, they were entirely fictitious), then I’m even more negatively disposed towards the audit profession.Clearly if there was a sale for £1M and no £1M ever appeared through any of the JDCL accounts then that is basic stuff but if the fraud was sophisticated enough to match payments then it gets very hard to spot compounded if (as with Tuke) the deals were often multi car involving swaps and trades
BobToc said:
I’m no expert, but I would have thought so! I mean what I struggle with is that they didn’t (allegedly) fake one transaction but twenty nine. Mental.
Isn't it a case of getting away with it once (probably on a smaller ££ scale) then doing it again and again each time getting more confident that you are so clever that no one else will ever see what you are doing, until someone does....Ok i'm no accountant but I would have thought if the books had showed he'd done so many profitable transactions
the tax liability would have been huge, as a company what is the advantage in saying in the books I've earned
millions when I haven't?
As for DD, how hard is it to look at the bank accounts to see £50k go out to buy a car and The £million come in when sold.
Lying the other way round would make more sense, sending the funds offshore to hide profits.
the tax liability would have been huge, as a company what is the advantage in saying in the books I've earned
millions when I haven't?
As for DD, how hard is it to look at the bank accounts to see £50k go out to buy a car and The £million come in when sold.
Lying the other way round would make more sense, sending the funds offshore to hide profits.
tight fart said:
Ok i'm no accountant but I would have thought if the books had showed he'd done so many profitable transactions
the tax liability would have been huge, as a company what is the advantage in saying in the books I've earned
millions when I haven't?
As for DD, how hard is it to look at the bank accounts to see £50k go out to buy a car and The £million come in when sold.
Lying the other way round would make more sense, sending the funds offshore to hide profits.
The tax liability was significant and it was paid. It was borrowed money and it was necessary to perpetuate the fraud. Remember that the shareholders (Hood) would inflate the company valuation via the bigger earnings.the tax liability would have been huge, as a company what is the advantage in saying in the books I've earned
millions when I haven't?
As for DD, how hard is it to look at the bank accounts to see £50k go out to buy a car and The £million come in when sold.
Lying the other way round would make more sense, sending the funds offshore to hide profits.
Reading the Administrators report they have already claimed and received a Corporation Tax refund from HMRC for 8.3M
The administration isn't going to cost just 13.5M as stated above. They expect legal fees and expenses to exceed 13.5M AND administrator fees to exceed 6.5M. So in excess of £20M.
HMRC did go after Hood and filed bankruptcy petitions. No idea what for but why not criminal charges. Funny that a third party paid HMRC to settle Hoods debts (his wife I'm guessing).
mk1coopers said:
BobToc said:
I’m no expert, but I would have thought so! I mean what I struggle with is that they didn’t (allegedly) fake one transaction but twenty nine. Mental.
Isn't it a case of getting away with it once (probably on a smaller ££ scale) then doing it again and again each time getting more confident that you are so clever that no one else will ever see what you are doing, until someone does....Unfunny echo from the past with amazing similarities
Gray v Smith & Ors | [2013] EWHC 4136 (Comm) | England and Wales High Court (Commercial Court) | Judgment | Law | CaseMine
and
https://cases.justia.com/federal/district-courts/n...
Is Richard Edwards still in the fancy motor trade
Gray v Smith & Ors | [2013] EWHC 4136 (Comm) | England and Wales High Court (Commercial Court) | Judgment | Law | CaseMine
and
https://cases.justia.com/federal/district-courts/n...
Is Richard Edwards still in the fancy motor trade
Noyzboy said:
Unfunny echo from the past with amazing similarities
Gray v Smith & Ors | [2013] EWHC 4136 (Comm) | England and Wales High Court (Commercial Court) | Judgment | Law | CaseMine
and
https://cases.justia.com/federal/district-courts/n...
Is Richard Edwards still in the fancy motor trade
Too long to read all of it, but it’s shocking reading.......Gray v Smith & Ors | [2013] EWHC 4136 (Comm) | England and Wales High Court (Commercial Court) | Judgment | Law | CaseMine
and
https://cases.justia.com/federal/district-courts/n...
Is Richard Edwards still in the fancy motor trade
neutral 3 said:
Too long to read all of it, but it’s shocking reading.......
I’ve got to page 12 and my heads already fuzzy. If I was a defendant I’d be very worried - the US system is very complex, expensive and won’t care about them being English or not. This is the part that would worry me the most - Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) comes with a 20 year sentence if successfully prosecuted. Unlike the UK where it seems acceptable to file for bankruptcy and walk away, in the States it’s used a lot.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Racketeer-Influen...
Eta - I’ve got to the end to realise it relates to September 2017, wonder how it ended.
Some extra digging shows that the case against all defendants apart from Thomas Hamann was dropped in April 2018.
https://cases.justia.com/federal/district-courts/n...
Edited by Petrus1983 on Monday 6th September 04:00
A previous case involving Mr Edwards...
https://www.casemine.com/judgement/uk/5a8ff75160d0...
Shorter version
https://www.wilmotslitigation.co.uk/wilmots-litiga...
https://www.casemine.com/judgement/uk/5a8ff75160d0...
Shorter version
https://www.wilmotslitigation.co.uk/wilmots-litiga...
Edited by wisbech on Monday 6th September 08:34
Gassing Station | Classic Cars and Yesterday's Heroes | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff