Guest Deleted member Posted August 25, 2015 Share Posted August 25, 2015 Industrial and Provident Society. The society lost that status due to failing to submit the necessary paperwork to the FCA in 2008/09/10 It was fined, failed to pay the fine, and subsequently struck off. sadly, none of the paperwork was received from the FCA https://www.fca.org.uk/static/fca/documents/societies-prosecuted-2012.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Essix Blue Posted August 25, 2015 Share Posted August 25, 2015 Industrial and Provident Society. The society lost that status due to failing to submit the necessary paperwork to the FCA in 2008/09/10 It was fined, failed to pay the fine, and subsequently struck off. sadly, none of the paperwork was received from the FCA https://www.fca.org.uk/static/fca/documents/societies-prosecuted-2012.pdf Hang on - you weren't on the board then were you? Can't remember when I left, probably about '07. Wasn't James on the board at that time? Neil even?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Deleted member Posted August 25, 2015 Share Posted August 25, 2015 I think Neil was - for a couple of days James was on the board for quite a while during the period they defaulted - not sure exactly how long though. I joined the Board late on in 2010 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Essix Blue Posted August 25, 2015 Share Posted August 25, 2015 Might the PPW have gone to the old office - the Trust office at either the club or Parkside Road?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Deleted member Posted August 25, 2015 Share Posted August 25, 2015 I believe Daz has been in touch with the FCA regards the missing post. Sadly they aren't being (or weren't) particularly helpful - I know for some time there was discussion taking place about reinstating it but I believe thats a non-starter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Essix Blue Posted August 25, 2015 Share Posted August 25, 2015 I believe Daz has been in touch with the FCA regards the missing post. Sadly they aren't being (or weren't) particularly helpful - I know for some time there was discussion taking place about reinstating it but I believe thats a non-starter Well for something as important as that you'd think they'd send it recorded delivery Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Deleted member Posted August 25, 2015 Share Posted August 25, 2015 You'd think so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Essix Blue Posted August 25, 2015 Share Posted August 25, 2015 So what's the problem with it all?? I'm guessing W'ite kept trading as a charitable trust, when it wasn't. Is this the funds in hand you allude to that needs to be donated somewhere? what about now - just it just trade as a normal company?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Deleted member Posted August 25, 2015 Share Posted August 25, 2015 Yes W'ite trade as a normal Ltd Co now. And yes, as they were blissfully unaware of the loss of IPS status they carried on trading - until the matter was actually brought to our attention by a member who saw the announcement in the Press. Thats why the advice was sought Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeeJayOne Posted August 25, 2015 Author Share Posted August 25, 2015 Actually, it isn't as black and white as that. As the original post states: Its been a while... Almost three years (27 February 2012) since Wednesdayite were prosecuted under the Industrial and Provident Societies Act 1965, fined and ultimately stripped of the IPS status they held. https://www.fca.org.uk/static/fca/documents/societies-prosecuted-2012.pdf Two years since we're led to believe that Wednesdayite directors were informed of the issue by a member who read it in a newspaper, in January 2013 (and neglected to inform members/prospective members of the issue whilst continuing to trade on the same basis, using the same articles and continuing to promote itself as an IPS for c.18 months after even this) Almost 6 months since members were eventually informed, the new company set up and promises made as to looking into the situation with solicitors/appropriation of funds from the old company to the new one (including funds paid or donated to specific causes or for specific services under the guise of being an IPS) and communicating those findings. ...Is there an update? Is the house in order? Nothing on the website that everyone is continuously told to check... The importance of having a well run supporters trust/organisation is of particular relevance now. What if it turns out that whoever the new potential owners are they are absolutely crooks or have some nefarious scheme behind their purchase of the club (not saying this is the case or ever will be the case, but at this stage, who knows)? Who/what group are going to mobilise and stand up for the fans if it is the case? One of the issues not really addressed by Wednesdayite so far (even in the excellent update from Nigel on the last page - thanks) is that Wednesdayite continued to trade on the same basis for around 18 months following being made aware (by a member) of being prosecuted and essentially struck off as an IPS by the FCA. So, one of the big issues is on what basis WERE Wednesdayite trading during this time? And were members misled by not being informed of the issue and by the continuation of the society, despite not having the IPS basis (yet still operating under the same articles and continuing to advertise themselves as an IPS for all this time) - including funds for membership services based on being that IPS and under those articles and advertised as such, and donations made by fans to that IPS on that basis too? Other little things came into play too, such as were Wednesdayite's contracts still valid considering the IPS entity no longer officially existed, and were things like insurances, etc, valid? Potentially, I believe that Wednesday did consciously falsely advertise and potentially fraudulently sold services for a period. Unsurprisingly they don't seem to want to address this point or answer that question. In theory members from that period could have a claim against the organisation. However, the funds issue is (or should be) the priority. We're coming up on three years since Wednesdayite were made aware (by a member) of being prosecuted and essentially struck off from being an IPS, and over a year since the new company was formed and promises were made to investigate the issues and communicate the findings. I'm assuming from the latest update from Nigel that the funds can't be appropriated for the new company and have to be distributed to local charitable organisations as dictated by the previous articles of the old IPS (as we all suspected would be the case), so there is some movement there at least. Its about time that started to happen and short staffed or not should be made a priority after all this time. I suggest the funds are given to the Sheffield Wednesday Community Programme, which is a charitable organisation in the same general locale, with largely the same aims as Wednesdayite. SHEFFIELD SHOP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeeJayOne Posted August 25, 2015 Author Share Posted August 25, 2015 A lot of the previous discussion about the whole scenario can be found in this previous thread: http://www.owlstalk.co.uk/forums/index.php/topic/216642-general-meeting-reminder/ SHEFFIELD SHOP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Essix Blue Posted August 25, 2015 Share Posted August 25, 2015 Besides yourself James - are any other members that you know of, past or present, seeking answers on a similar vein to yours or is it just you? I was a member during this time - but I'm not now. It does seem alarming that W'ite continued to trade knowing the situation they were in - if it's true. (Not calling anyone a liar here of course, it's just the story is one sided ATM). However as far as I'm aware the accounts of W'ite were always submitted on time and were deemed acceptable by the members and committee. Unless someone was seeking some legal address and / or claims are being made of funds being used inappropriately I don't see the point in going over this again? Yes the funds currently held need to be distributed accordingly to whichever organisations they seem fit to receive it, other than that I fail to see anything worth worrying about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mkowl Posted August 25, 2015 Share Posted August 25, 2015 Thanks for the summary Nigel. I spoke with Paul back at the Wolves away match last season and whilst it wasn't 100% certain the drawing the line in the sand with the old structure and voting by the then members of what to do with the money was sort of mentioned. As a long time critic of certain aspects of how Wednesdayite was run behind the scenes - never critical of the day to day stuff - then my twopenneth for what it is worth was that approach outlined above was sufficient and appropriate to bring the matter to a conclusion. I would reserve a big question mark if one of the options was to transfer the money to new Wednesdayite for want of a better term. Others may disagree but as a clean slate for all concerned and to stop accusations of folk potentially benefitting (indirectly) from past errors would seem an appropriate outcome. So giving the money to a local charity, youth football teams, Smile or combination thereof I consider closes the book. I appreciate if hard work has gone into generating the cash in the first instance that may be hard to take - but sometimes doing the right thing takes precedent Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeeJayOne Posted August 25, 2015 Author Share Posted August 25, 2015 I'm not sure all the members of the time are aware of the issues, in all fairness - so I imagine there aren't many complaining (and I even admit that even if they were aware, I'm not sure how many, if any, would complain - but that isn't a question for me to answer really). I just wish that it was recognised and addressed in a more timely and proper manner, with proper communication to members, which - in my opinion of course - hasn't been done. But, hopefully everyone recognises there were issues and we can draw a line under that part of it and get to the meat of trying to get the funds sorted and hopefully distributed to a worthy organisation like the community programme in a much more timely fashion. Then, for me, Wednesdayite and all its directors/volunteers/members need to take a step back and work out what is going to happen going forwards. It seems that the organisation is almost a non-entity and largely irrelevant now. Personally, I feel that anyone who has been involved in the above issues from start to finish should step down and not be involved with a fans' organisation any further - and yes, that includes me. In my view, and this might not be shared by anyone else, steps should be being taken to actively find new blood from different places to take on the organisation and make it more relevant and appealing - or wind it down and let new people build a new more exciting and active fans' organisation. Obviously its not as easy as just saying it like that, but that's my view. SHEFFIELD SHOP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Deleted member Posted August 25, 2015 Share Posted August 25, 2015 (edited) 1. All wednesdsyite members were fully informed of the events at the beginning of last season 2. No. No members at all are chasing this. James isn't a member as far as I understand, and as far as I can see he's the only non member desperate to get answers and see resignations 3. The remaining board members are independent directors, don't need to be voted on by anybody. It's a standard limited company. 4. I'm sure given the advice they've had that too suggesr they've acted fraudulently, either knowingly or not, is deeply offensive if defamatory. But not surprising. 5. Nobody benefits personally that is involved with the organisation. The only people who benefit are the members and groups of disadvNtaged people, the club, the community programme and the clubs academy. 6. It's not really for James or any other non member to dictate what should take priority. It's easy to say 'regardless of numbers' when you sat on a 12 man board and still couldn't ensure something as important as a regulatory submission was overlooked. 7. Given the professional advice received I suggest that any further allegations of fraudulent activity are addressed via the relevant authorities, and given I was involved at that time it's no longer appropriate for me to comment forget given that any action would involve me. Needless to say I would absolutely welcome that level of scrutiny. 8. Crack on James Edited August 25, 2015 by Deleted member Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mkowl Posted August 25, 2015 Share Posted August 25, 2015 Fair point but i am not sure there are any takers to run a fans group. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Deleted member Posted August 25, 2015 Share Posted August 25, 2015 Fair point but i am not sure there are any takers to run a fans group. I wonder why Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mkowl Posted August 25, 2015 Share Posted August 25, 2015 I wonder why Erm let me think - if you raise your head above the parapet you get shot at, everyone can run it better than the people doing it and you have to only look to attract the cool fans apparently. I wouldn't go within 130 miles of doing owt myself Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mkowl Posted August 25, 2015 Share Posted August 25, 2015 1. All wednesdsyite members were fully informed of the events at the beginning of last season 2. No. No members at all are chasing this. James isn't a member as far as I understand, and as far as I can see he's the only non member desperate to get answers and see resignations 3. The remaining board members are independent directors, don't need to be voted on by anybody. It's a standard limited company. 4. I'm sure given the advice they've had that too suggesr they've acted fraudulently, either knowingly or not, is deeply offensive if defamatory. But not surprising. 5. Nobody benefits personally that is involved with the organisation. The only people who benefit are the members and groups of disadvNtaged people, the club, the community programme and the clubs academy. 6. It's not really for James or any other non member to dictate what should take priority. It's easy to say 'regardless of numbers' when you sat on a 12 man board and still couldn't ensure something as important as a regulatory submission was overlooked. 7. Given the professional advice received I suggest that any further allegations of fraudulent activity are addressed via the relevant authorities, and given I was involved at that time it's no longer appropriate for me to comment forget given that any action would involve me. Needless to say I would absolutely welcome that level of scrutiny. 8. Crack on James I am not sure anyone has ever accused there being fraudulent activity. At worst there was a breach of fiduciary responsibility as officers of the IPS, the matter would have been significantly worse IF the money had been lost of course and that is not the case. The other issues eg insurance cover may well have been a problem if there had been a circumstance leading to a claim but there wasn't so we move on. As i have often said my issue was more that during the time of the default period Wednesdayite were in a position of power over the club - albeit limited - when their own house wasn't in order. If Wednesdayite mark 3 was going to be a political animal then i agree that those involved then should have no place now. However its not, it is a car park operator, social club and away travel organiser that does good work for the community. What it should stick to and if so then there is no issue in my mind of those involved continuing to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Deleted member Posted August 25, 2015 Share Posted August 25, 2015 Read back to the previous page Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now