stewarty 1,879 Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 From the beeb: Rangers administrators Duff and Phelps have been ordered to prove there is no conflict of interest over their role. The move, ordered by Lord Hodge at the Court of Session in Edinburgh, comes after a recent BBC documentary raised concerns about the issue. Lord Hodge said he took no view about the BBC programme. But he said Duff and Phelps should produce a report showing they had obtained and acted on legal advice on the question of conflict of interest. Rangers was forced into administration by HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) on 14 February over non-payment of tax totalling about £14m. Rangers liquidated Craig Whyte, who bought the club from Sir David Murray last year, was successful in having his nominated firm, Duff and Phelps, appointed. Following a hearing at the Court of Session, presided over by Lord Hodge, David Whitehouse and Paul Clark were appointed as joint administrators of the club. They have since negotiated a sale of the club's assets to a consortium led by Charles Green for £5.5m after creditors rejected an agreement which would have seen Rangers repay pennies in the pound for estimated debts of about £134m. The 140-year-old club is now set to be wound up by HMRC's preferred liquidators BDO. Mr Green has since formed a new club and is attempting to get access to the Scottish Premier League. Last month, BBC Scotland broadcast the documentary - Rangers: The Men Who Sold The Jerseys. The programme raised questions over a possible conflict of interest for Rangers' administrators which were strenuously denied by Duff and Phelps. The issue over any possible conflict of interest was raised by Lord Hodge at a hearing about the administration process on Friday. 'Public interest' The judge said he took no view about what the BBC had said, but wanted to know whether Duff and Phelps had obtained and acted on legal advice on the question of conflict of interest. Lord Hodge said he had done nothing until now because he did not want to hinder the process of Rangers going into liquidation. But, he told the accountants' lawyers: "There is considerable public interest in this jurisdiction in relation to the administration." Lord Hodge added: "I do not want the administration to come to an end without having received that report." The report demanded by Lord Hodge is expected to be ready in three weeks and a further court hearing is likely to be arranged after that. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 nothing standard about this. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GovanAllan 0 Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 (edited) He's asking for them to report on themselves should be easy enough, a nothing story. Nice to see in there, they still have the 140year old club is getting wound up, get the facts right ffs. Just noticed its the Beeb not surprised its a load of crap. Edited June 22, 2012 by GovanAllan 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
amms 0 Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 He's asking them to prove they took legal advice about the potential conflict of interest. Assuming they did then it's not a big story. I'm not sure what'll happen if they didn't. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chilledbear 16 Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 A question if you please. Probably quite basic but it has been on my mind. With the rumours of Green not having the funds and that he needs the ST money. I thought he had to prove to Admin that he had enough investors and money in the bank to fund the Club going forward, before they would allow him to buy. Surely they wouldn't take the ST money as proven funds. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 A question if you please. Probably quite basic but it has been on my mind. With the rumours of Green not having the funds and that he needs the ST money. I thought he had to prove to Admin that he had enough investors and money in the bank to fund the Club going forward, before they would allow him to buy. Surely they wouldn't take the ST money as proven funds. administratiors are indeed supposed to pay great care to the future of businesses. but don't forget d&p claim to have seen a bank account with over 20 million in it. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chilledbear 16 Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 Wrong thread! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 He's asking them to prove they took legal advice about the potential conflict of interest. Assuming they did then it's not a big story. I'm not sure what'll happen if they didn't. indeed assuming they did and assuming he agrees with the advice. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GovanAllan 0 Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 A question if you please. Probably quite basic but it has been on my mind. With the rumours of Green not having the funds and that he needs the ST money. I thought he had to prove to Admin that he had enough investors and money in the bank to fund the Club going forward, before they would allow him to buy. Surely they wouldn't take the ST money as proven funds. No they wouldn't but don't let the facts get in the way of rumour and scare stories. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 I just think d&p asked to see proof of funds to cover their arse. the wouldnt care or even believe he had the cash to take us forward. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.