Board made aware of more links between Green and Whyte

[barca72 440]

lol worthington group is paying for whytes court case v us. i think their is a nice clear link.

 

How do you work that out?

[UCF2008 0]

How do you work that out?

 

Maybe because Worthington Group announced it to the Stock Exchange?.

 

http://www.investegate.co.uk/worthington-group/rns/diversification/201304170811385415C/

[barca72 440]

"LFL, a recently incorporated company, has a number of subsidiaries, namely Sevco 5088 Ltd, Law Capital Ltd, Litigation Capital Ltd and Media Litigation Ltd (LFL and its subsidiaries hereafter being referred to as the Law Financial Group).

 

The assets of Sevco 5088 Ltd include a claim, which has been independently reviewed by Leading Counsel who is also a Deputy High Court Judge, to all of the business and assets of RFC 2012 Plc which were purchased by Sevco 5088 Limited or Sevco Scotland Ltd from the administrators of RFC 2012 plc in June of 2012. Sevco Scotland Ltd was subsequently renamed The Rangers Football Club Limited and its share capital was acquired by Rangers International Football Club Plc, the shares of which are now traded on AIM. It is the position of Sevco 5088 Ltd that it is the rightful owner of the business and those assets. After examination of the evidence, Leading Counsel's advice is that there is a prima facie case to answer. "

 

Where in the above statement, copied from your link, does it say that Worthington will sue RIFC? It says Sevco 5088 is a subsidiary of LFL, and included in the assets of Sevco 5088 is a claim to assets of RFC 2012 PLC, etc. Because LFL claim that Sevco 5088 is a subsidiary of theirs does not make it so, they would have to prove that. Charles Green created that company. If Whyte wants to prove that his newly created company owns Sevco 5088 as a subsidiary then he will have to engage Charles Green, not RIFC. Also, because Worthington's leading counsel says there is a prima facie case to answer does not make that so either. We seen that before when Rod McKenzie of Harper & McCleod said there was a prima facie case to answer in the side letter case.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

worthington and whyte go together like peanut butter and jelly.

[forlanssister 3,050]

"LFL, a recently incorporated company, has a number of subsidiaries, namely Sevco 5088 Ltd, Law Capital Ltd, Litigation Capital Ltd and Media Litigation Ltd (LFL and its subsidiaries hereafter being referred to as the Law Financial Group).

 

The assets of Sevco 5088 Ltd include a claim, which has been independently reviewed by Leading Counsel who is also a Deputy High Court Judge, to all of the business and assets of RFC 2012 Plc which were purchased by Sevco 5088 Limited or Sevco Scotland Ltd from the administrators of RFC 2012 plc in June of 2012. Sevco Scotland Ltd was subsequently renamed The Rangers Football Club Limited and its share capital was acquired by Rangers International Football Club Plc, the shares of which are now traded on AIM. It is the position of Sevco 5088 Ltd that it is the rightful owner of the business and those assets. After examination of the evidence, Leading Counsel's advice is that there is a prima facie case to answer. "

 

Where in the above statement, copied from your link, does it say that Worthington will sue RIFC? It says Sevco 5088 is a subsidiary of LFL, and included in the assets of Sevco 5088 is a claim to assets of RFC 2012 PLC, etc. Because LFL claim that Sevco 5088 is a subsidiary of theirs does not make it so, they would have to prove that. Charles Green created that company. If Whyte wants to prove that his newly created company owns Sevco 5088 as a subsidiary then he will have to engage Charles Green, not RIFC. Also, because Worthington's leading counsel says there is a prima facie case to answer does not make that so either. We seen that before when Rod McKenzie of Harper & McCleod said there was a prima facie case to answer in the side letter case.

 

Do you remember the monies found laying in the Collyer Bristow client account?

 

Specifically the circa £3m attributed to the Jerome Pension Fund well that belongs to the pensioners of the Worthington Group.

 

Here's the last paragraph of the Interim Financial Statement issued by the Worthington Group plc on 29 November 2012.

 

Following completion of the fund raising, as described above, the Pension Scheme funding risk continues to represent the principle risk factor faced by the Company. We continue to monitor the Pension Scheme investments and liabilities, which represent the key risks to the Company at present. Details of our principal risk factors can be found in the director's report on page 3 of the 2012 Annual Report and Accounts. There have been no significant changes to the principal risks in the half year to 30th September 2012. However, the administrators of Rangers FC have now been replaced by BDO as liquidators and litigants. The Company is still confident that the £3m of Pension Scheme funds, currently held under a court order with regard to an uncompleted loan, will be returned to the Pension Scheme in due course, along with costs.

 

Doug Ware

Chief Executive

29 November 2012

[the gunslinger 3,366]

trying to kid on worthington and whyte arent related wont get us anywhere we need to be.

[barca72 440]

trying to kid on worthington and whyte arent related wont get us anywhere we need to be.

 

This only shows a connection between Whyte and Worthington, someone to bankroll Whyte's legal expenses. But I repeat ...

 

Where in the above statement, copied from your link, does it say that Worthington will sue RIFC? It says Sevco 5088 is a subsidiary of LFL, and included in the assets of Sevco 5088 is a claim to assets of RFC 2012 PLC, etc. Because LFL claim that Sevco 5088 is a subsidiary of theirs does not make it so, they would have to prove that. Charles Green created that company. If Whyte wants to prove that his newly created company owns Sevco 5088 as a subsidiary then he will have to engage Charles Green, not RIFC. Also, because Worthington's leading counsel says there is a prima facie case to answer does not make that so either. We seen that before when Rod McKenzie of Harper & McCleod said there was a prima facie case to answer in the side letter case.

 

I tried to include your reply also, forlanssister but it didn't work. Both of you are making a case for a previous connection between Whyte and Worthington, but it still doesn't prove that either are going to engage RIFC in court proceedings. Whyte will have to prove a case for ownership of Sevco 5088 before there can be any causal link between him and RIFC's shares and assets.

Edited April 21, 2013 by barca72

[UCF2008 0]

This only shows a connection between Whyte and Worthington, someone to bankroll Whyte's legal expenses. But I repeat ...

 

Where in the above statement, copied from your link, does it say that Worthington will sue RIFC? It says Sevco 5088 is a subsidiary of LFL, and included in the assets of Sevco 5088 is a claim to assets of RFC 2012 PLC, etc. Because LFL claim that Sevco 5088 is a subsidiary of theirs does not make it so, they would have to prove that. Charles Green created that company. If Whyte wants to prove that his newly created company owns Sevco 5088 as a subsidiary then he will have to engage Charles Green, not RIFC. Also, because Worthington's leading counsel says there is a prima facie case to answer does not make that so either. We seen that before when Rod McKenzie of Harper & McCleod said there was a prima facie case to answer in the side letter case.

 

I tried to include your reply also, forlanssister but it didn't work. Both of you are making a case for a previous connection between Whyte and Worthington, but it still doesn't prove that either are going to engage RIFC in court proceedings. Whyte will have to prove a case for ownership of Sevco 5088 before there can be any causal link between him and RIFC's shares and assets.

 

You're absolutely correct in terms of any Worthington Group legal action. It's not going to be Worthington Group Vs Rangers. It would most likely be Worthington Group Vs Green & Ahmad. The problem is those two alone account for a 12.5% shareholding in Rangers.

 

Then if you take into account how the ownership of Sevco5088 in the event Worthington's claim is successful, you'd be looking at other members of the original takeover consortium and how their shareholding may be affected by the proceedings, then it's potentially a disaster for Rangers.

 

You're also right that just because they say they've been advised of a prima facie case to answer, doesn't mean anythnig has been decided. Whyte has an appaling courtroom record in all of this and on his own I don't think he'd stand much of a chance. I also don't think the Earley brothers would bring much to table on that front. Other parties involved in Worthington Group might however make a difference in this case.

[forlanssister 3,050]

 

I tried to include your reply also, forlanssister but it didn't work. Both of you are making a case for a previous connection between Whyte and Worthington, but it still doesn't prove that either are going to engage RIFC in court proceedings. Whyte will have to prove a case for ownership of Sevco 5088 before there can be any causal link between him and RIFC's shares and assets.

 

The connection between Whyte and Worthington is irrefutable and ongoing.

 

All Whyte did last week was move money out of one company associated with him to another under the guise of selling the film rights etc, it the sort of thing he's ( and Earley) always done.

 

I'm inclined to think Whyte is banking on the nuisance value of any claim of his but to rule out the possibility that any of his claims has validity would be a foolish act.

 

This has a long way to run yet.

 

It took 9 years to complete the liquidation of Whyte's Vital UK Ltd.

[sannybear 0]

FS - Is there any connection between the £3m pension fund mentioned in the 2nd paragraph and RFC ?

 

cheers