- This topic has 20 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 2 months ago by
.
- Posts
The Registrar of Companies in England & Wales has placed on the public file of Stradbrook Holdings Ltd a letter dated next Tuesday 26 January saying that, unless cause is shown to the contrary, he intends to strike off and dissolve that company in 3 months time.
The reference on the (GAZ 1) letter is DEF6, which usually is a sign that a letter has been issued on the initiative of Companies House due to a default by a company.
The company, along with its last-shown subsidiary Centurycomm Ltd and parent company Stradbrook Acquisitions, continues to be listed as overdue since 31/10/2009 in filing its accounts.
The Registrar’s letter helpfully reminds the Directors that on dissolution of a company all property and rights vested in it are deemed bona vacantia and become property of the Crown.
In other words, that the next owner of the RP could end up being the Crown.
Perhaps the Crown could then bundle it with the Tote and sell on as a package
Don’t know what lenders to the RP might make of such a development, but presumably would not be best pleased were things to get complicated just because someone wasn’t able to meet routine filing obligations on time….
I wonder if they will completely redesign the website, making it very hard to navigate without your pc crashing.
Oh wait a minute….
- Total Posts 17716
Standard letter surely? That’s not to say trouble is not just around the corner who knows with these large companies.
Could be doing with new owners the current ones certainly are doing very little to promote racing.
Their latest move is to now charge a fee to anyone who wants to post a comment on their website. (You have to be a paying member)
Surely not the way to go if they to attract new people into racing. That doesn’t seem logical to me and starts a few alarm bells ringing when companies start charging for things they never did before.
I questioned BM on this when he visited this forum and his answer would have insulted the intellegece of a 5 year old. He said you can still access form on their site for free which of course is absolute rubbish unless I’m sadly mistaken. As far as I can see you get names and positions but can’t view the comments with regards to what happened during the race…..that’s like having a map with no roads between towns telling you how to get there.
With other websites like ATR, Sporting life and most bookmakers allowing free access to form I can’t see any logic in their charging policy and it reeks of desperation to me.
Fist, the "comments in running" are still there for free, if you want the analysis then you have to pay.
Colin
- Total Posts 17716
How embarrassing never saw the hide comments link..apologies to BM and the RP on that score and thank you Colin. Pity someone hadn’t pointed out the obvious to me before I made a complete as off myself.
Standard letter surely? ….
yes – the standard GAZ 1 ("First Gazette") letter precedes the standard GAZ 2 ("Second and Final Gazette") letter that announces the standard striking-off and dissolution of a company.
its a bit of a way down the standard road once a company’s name is advertised for dissolution in The London Gazette, that important source of information for the credit reference industry.
absolutely the whole procedure is standard enough for a mom-and-pop company where mom-and-pop have lost interest and the Registrar is left to tidy-up.
its not really that standard though for the owner of an operating national daily newspaper.
same letter with same date now showing also for Centurycomm Ltd
will they get the treble up with Stradbrook Acquisitions ?
wit – I have seen a number of these types of threads from you over the past twelve months. What’s your beef with the Racing Post ? Were you on the payroll previously ?
nope, have never had any connection with them (nor with any competitor), other than years ago i used to buy it off the news-stand.
i’m just an ordinary member of the public who would like to see the information that the RP companies are legally obliged to put on the public file.
for companies in the info-publishing business, owned moreover by finance professionals, it seems a very odd situation that their financial statements aren’t filed on time….
….which then raises the question – why ?
its really not that difficult to stay the right side of that law, but this is now the second time (from two occasions) that accounts are months late under the new ownership.
the first late accounts covered the period to the day before the new owners completed their acquisition.
the ones due now will be the first set publicly to report financial performance under the new regime, to 31/12/2008.
i want to see that report.
i’m entitled (along with the rest of the world) to see it
no more to it than that.
good to see the registrar of companies actively protecting that right (and btw quite independently – i’ve not been in touch with him).
best regards
wit
And I’d add that I’m sure there are lots of people reading the forum to whom something like this is of interest.
- Total Posts 17716
Be that as it may Clivex, it would still be interesting to see if the accounts actually support the rosy view painted for us recently by the RP’s editor.
clivexx
if they share your approach, things are likely to get even more interesting.
the reason for a first Gazette notice (such as these) is to make aware lenders, landlords, suppliers, employees and the rest of the world, that the "gazetted" company has been put on a formal track that (if nothing is done to divert it) will lead to its dissolution in three months time.
dissolution includes the company’s bank account being frozen and any credit balance passing to the Crown along with all other assets.
liabilities however stay with the (then asset-denuded) company.
the assets often can be got back and the company restored, but not without cost, interruption and getting a Court order.
a prudent lender, landlord, supplier, employee will therefore take note of a first Gazette notice and consider how best to protect itself, contractually and otherwise, against the advertised contingency – eg maybe tighten credit terms or switch to cash dealing.
so while a first Gazette notice is usually not fatal (any domino effect aside), its not as if its without consequence.
why would any business get into such a position?
The likeliest reasons –
1) Poor management
2) Strategic decision to delay publication of financial info for commercial reasons.
From the background it would very much appear that 2) is the favourite in this case
:oops: How embarrassing never saw the hide comments link..apologies to BM and the RP on that score and thank you Colin. Pity someone hadn’t pointed out the obvious to me before I made a complete as off myself
.
I like you the way you are!
…but…but…that cannot be.
apart from the criminal sanctions under the Companies Act, surely deliberately or negligently failing to make available to persons dealing with a company financial information which a statute compels be disclosed, would amount to actionable misrepresentation by the company and/or its directors ?
surely none of them would do anything like that ?
update at Companies House:
Stradbrook Holdings Ltd
:
On 2 March 2010, Alan Byrne signed the directors report and balance sheet, and Deloittes the audit report, for the 15 months ending 31 December 2008.
However:
– there are no figures at all in the column for 2009 in the P&L report, just a "-" in each place;
and
– the balance sheet figures are all repeats from the previous year’s balance sheet.
In other words, the company did nothing in the period.
A "nothing" filing that shows up four months late and 14 months after the end of the period. Why ?
But enough as of 6 March to get it off the "three-months-to-striking-off" list.
Stradbrook Acquisitions Ltd
This is the topmost company of the three. It managed to join the "three-months-to-striking-off" list with a GAZ 1 from the Registrar on 2 February. No sign yet of its accounts to 31/12/2008, now almost five months overdue.
Centurycomm Ltd
This is the bottom-most company of the three. It is now almost into the third month of its "three-months-to-striking-off" countdown. Again, no sign yet of its accounts to 31/12/2008, now almost five months overdue.
So top and bottom companies in the group ever-more in default and ever-closer to the end of the path to striking-off applied to them by the Registrar of Companies.
One month to go for Centurycomm……
How embarrassing never saw the hide comments link..apologies to BM and the RP on that score and thank you Colin. Pity someone hadn’t pointed out the obvious to me before I made a complete as off myself
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.