Jump to content

 

 

Recommended Posts

THE Crown Office will today issue a warrant for the arrest of disgraced former Rangers owner Craig Whyte, the Daily Record can exclusively reveal.

 

Whyte is wanted in connection with alleged fraud over his purchase of the Ibrox club in 2011.

 

The sensational news comes after it was revealed that police forces in England, acting on warrants from Police Scotland, made dawn arrests today in connection with a long-running inquiry into Rangers.

 

Four men were arrested at addresses in Thames Valley, Surrey and Cheshire.

 

The first of the four is Paul Clark, London managing director of former Rangers adminstrators Duff & Phelps.

 

The other three are former Duff & Phelps north of England managing director David Whitehouse, David Greer, a former partner in the business, and Gary Withey, a solicitor who worked with Whyte’s law firm Collyer Bristow.

 

 

The arrests came at 6am today.

 

Whyte, who has a flat in Monaco, is believed to be out of the country.

 

It is thought the allegations over which the men have been detained centre on claims that Grier and Whyte were known to each other before Duff & Phelps were appointed as Whyte’s choice of administrators for Rangers in 2012.

 

HMRC had at first opposed Whyte’s choice of administrators. Whyte bought the club from Sir David Murray in 2011 for £1 promising to wipe Rangers’ £18 million debt to Lloyds Banking Group.

 

It later emerged he had sold future season ticket sales to London firm Ticketus to finance the deal.

 

In 2013 financial industry regulators cleared Duff & Phelps of wrongdoing over the Rangers’ administration, though they said the company had left itself open to criticism.

 

 

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/craig-whyte-facing-arrest-crown-4628861

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It is thought the allegations over which the men have been detained centre on claims that Grier and Whyte were known to each other before Duff & Phelps were appointed as Whyte’s choice of administrators for Rangers in 2012.

 

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/craig-whyte-facing-arrest-crown-4628861

 

Interesting segment at 15mins 55secs

'RANGERS ADMINISTRATORS PRESS CONFERENCE ( FULL )'

 

1. Jacksons question is good.

2. Clark answer unsatisfactory

3. Whitehouse explanation actually helps paint the picture when you take into consideration the reallities of the situation within the period he talks about.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if this ends well, we could still be years away from all matters being resolved, and so much damage will have been done to Rangers that a full recovery may not happen.

 

If there are guilty parties here who are convicted of wrongdoing, Rangers and/or the Rangers support should consider instigating lawsuits against those who have been proven to have acted illegally.

 

The RFFF may have a part to play in this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any return to Oldco would means the fans absolutely MUST take control, for any individual would be unable to deal with the amounts involved. HMRC would be unlikely - hopefully - to pursue a fan owned entity for £100m.

 

It wouldn't matter who owned the entity; it's the entity that would be pusued for money, not the owners.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if this ends well, we could still be years away from all matters being resolved, and so much damage will have been done to Rangers that a full recovery may not happen.

 

If there are guilty parties here who are convicted of wrongdoing, Rangers and/or the Rangers support should consider instigating lawsuits against those who have been proven to have acted illegally.

 

The RFFF may have a part to play in this.

 

'Rangers' is unlikely to begin a lawsuit against anyone; skeltons and closets and all that. Any action would have to be instigated by individuals through the civil rather than criminal law courts. The advantage of that is that the requirements regarding proof are less; the disadvantage is that £500k is unlikely to get you very far.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If true, then the detention of Clark & Whitehouse could certainly point to the investigations being about far more than just Whyte's takeover, if not now, then certainly as the situation develops.

 

As ever though, criminal activities need to be proven and most of these men will try to lie and wriggle their way out of it via technicalities.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Duff and Phelps spokesman Marty Dauer said the firm was aware that three employees in the UK had been "detained for questioning in connection with work performed for Rangers Football Club".

 

He said this work "was commenced while these employees were part of MCR Partners, prior to its acquisition by Duff & Phelps in October of 2011".

 

He added: "Duff & Phelps has performed an internal investigation and commissioned an independent investigation of the related matters.

 

"As a result, we believe that our work for Rangers was conscientious, thorough and properly performed in every respect.

 

"Duff and Phelps has actively co-operated with all relevant investigating authorities throughout this process."

 

Mr Dauer said a subsequent review by the Insolvency Practitioners Association in 2013 had "cleared the firm of any wrongdoing or conflict of interest" over its involvement with Rangers.

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-30053692

 

Seems very prepared to 'wash his hands' of them re. work commenced pre MCR takeover by D&P / work for CW.

 

The apparent commissioning of another investigation also points to further doubt.

 

Other thing is were they not partners, rather than employees ?

As DragonT mentioned earlier.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It wouldn't matter who owned the entity; it's the entity that would be pusued for money, not the owners.

I think Andy is meaning that it would be harder to pursue the club - politically - if there was fan control.

 

The entity would be the same but a substantive change in its ownership could see a more benign attitude from HMRC. HMRC might have to be persuaded to back off, but they would be more likely to do so if they were about to bankrupt a club that a hundred thousand people had jointly invested in.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.